Thanks, SuperGlam!

Interesting that wikipedia is also 'a bit out of date' on this 'good news' development? see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merthyr_Vale_railway_station .

The litter problem certainly seems to have been there in September 2007, though: is it better now?

 

zed, tea is fine, too: in fact, you should compare notes with Lee - he's a tea fan, while I'm a coffee addict!

Please do let us know anything you find out, and add it to the topic Lee mentioned!

Chris 

Erm ... See http://www.railwaymagazine.co.uk/ for further information!

No, you weren't alone: my recent experience also suggested that the live departure boards were somehow blank!

Rather puzzled as to why I was just seeing a blank white space on my screen, I scrolled down - and found the actual departure board information, in a separate box below the other 'left and right hand' advertising boxes?

I suspect it's something to do with the inclusion of the platform information that John R flagged to us recently: the addition of one more column of information on the departure board view, as some PCs see it, seems to have caused the departure board itself to be 'squeezed' down to below the white space you may be seeing?

Sorry, I'm hopeless with the technical terminology needed to explain this properly - I just know what I can see, and how I solved it!

 

No.   

Hi, zed, and welcome to the Coffee Shop!

I think that's the problem, really: it's still not clear what has been rejected, and what (if anything) may still happen?

Chris 

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I think in both those examples, the train crew had actually lost control of the situation?  Due to the lack of, or misleading, information being given out by the train crew, those passengers who had been cooped up in very uncomfortable conditions only did what they felt was necessary to relieve the situation?

The point I was making is that having hermetically sealed carriages is fine - until something goes wrong!  The option of pushing down a few carriage door windows, to counteract the air-conditioning either not working or pushing hot air around if necessary, would perhaps avoid the need for anyone to smash windows?

 

Thanks, Tom!

Glad you're apparently none the worse for your extended bash! 

By the way, you seem to have modified your view on 444s? 

There are some advantages to having windows that can be opened if necessary, however:

See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/3127447.stm

Quote
"These new trains did not have windows that could open so it was like a greenhouse effect. The air conditioning broke down and we were left with almost no air inside the carriages. It was intolerable."

and http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2739939.stm

Quote
As the air-conditioning had stopped working and all the windows were sealed, he said, passengers first opened the doors via the emergency locks.  But they were later told they were about to be towed back to Waterloo, so the doors were closed and locked for safety.  But then the train did not move, he said. "We sat around for another two hours and that was when we had to break the windows because the only doors that we could open were on the side of the track that other trains were passing us by on.  Rather than being foolish and opening them on that side, we just smashed windows in order to get some air back into the place."

 

I, too, was rather disappointed to see FGW^▸ (First Great Western) staff setting a bad example at Nailsea, some time ago.

See the related topic at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=1624 for more comments on the subject of smoking on stations.

 

To be fair, the 1753 this evening was a 150/2, and we all managed to get on that (I even got a seat!).  However, perhaps a Friday evening is slightly quieter than earlier in the week, as some commuters leave work early.  For Monday to Thursday evenings, a 150/1 or a 158 would indeed be better!

It is indeed, Jez - and it is the 'occasional' use of a 143 that causes us so much grief at BTM^▸ (Bristol Temple Meads (strictly, it should be BRI))! 

As a mere passenger, I can't say what it should be - but it's usually a 150/2 (or, very occasionally a 150/1), or a two-car 158.

 

This evening, my beloved 1753 from BTM^▸ (Bristol Temple Meads (strictly, it should be BRI)) to Nailsea let me down, somewhat.

To be fair, it's the first time this has happened since 19 February (on the days I've been travelling, anyway).  However, I did find it so ironic that it happened again this evening, just while several local FGW^▸ (First Great Western) managers were holding a 'Meet the Manager' session on platform 3 at BTM!

Briefly, the 1753 was shown on the screens as being expected at 1759: not a particular problem.  However, when it arrived, there was a collective gasp of dismay: it was a 143  .  Sure enough, people got left behind again (including me): in fact, I was rather amused to see that the relief driver himself had to 'negotiate' with crammed passengers in the front of the train before they 'breathed in' sufficiently for him to get aboard himself!

I, and several others, encouraged by the platform announcer telling us that 'the next available service to Nailsea was the 1822', dutifully trudged off to platform 10 to wait for that.

By the way, I'm rather reluctant to put my head down and force my way on board the 1753 in such circumstances, because I think it's more important for those travelling to Bedminster or Parson Street to get on that train.  My next train is the 1822, but that doesn't stop at Bedminster or Parson Street, so if passengers for those stations don't get on the 1753, they've got a much longer wait than I'd have.

My problem for being considerate, I suppose? 

I^ll post this from me personally, not as a moderator: I don^t work for FGW^▸ (First Great Western), I^m just a commuter / passenger / customer:

I think the article itself puts this into its proper perspective: ^Mr Brown, gearing up for a series of tough local elections across Wales and England on May 1 ^  will say whatever is convenient, and if that includes bashing one particular TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company), that^s just what he^ll do.  In the spirit of ^spin^ - don^t let the facts get in the way of a good headline.

I don^t know when Gordon ^m on the side of the passenger^ Brown last actually travelled by FGW, but I use them just about every weekday, and some weekends as well.  I have found their service much better over the past couple of months: fair enough, the December 2007 timetable was a bit of a disaster in its introduction (that^s why I joined this forum, after all!) and FGW have acknowledged there were problems - but their service has been getting steadily better since January.  It^s therefore rather mean to criticise them now by saying ^they^ve got to start improving or else^: they are already much improved!

Andrew Haines has set up a good team ^ people with a proven ability to turn things around.  I think they should be allowed to get on with the job they^ve started - don^t give them a hard time now, when they are actually starting to make a difference!

I also think there should be some scrutiny of the role played in this by Network Rail and the Department for Transport: it^s not really fair to pick on just one of the three protagonists in this.  Or is it perhaps not so politically convenient for a politician to be seen to be criticising the other two organisations involved ^ ?