Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 13:55 28 Mar 2024
- Man held over stabbing in front of train passengers
- How do I renew my UK passport and what is the 10-year rule?
* Jet2 launches first flight from Liverpool airport
- Easter travel warning as millions set to hit roads
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber
27/09/25 - 200 years of passenger trains

On this day
28th Mar (1917)
Bideford, Westward Ho! and Appledore closed (link)

Train RunningCancelled
12:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
13:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington
13:26 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington
13:28 Weymouth to Gloucester
13:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
14:13 Par to Newquay
14:19 Westbury to Swindon
15:10 Newquay to Par
15:14 Swindon to Westbury
Short Run
08:03 London Paddington to Penzance
10:55 Paignton to London Paddington
11:23 Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central
11:29 Weymouth to Gloucester
11:48 London Paddington to Carmarthen
12:03 London Paddington to Penzance
12:30 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare
12:42 Bristol Temple Meads to Salisbury
13:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
13:07 Salisbury to Bristol Temple Meads
13:10 Gloucester to Weymouth
13:26 Okehampton to Exeter Central
14:05 Salisbury to Bristol Temple Meads
15:10 Gloucester to Weymouth
16:19 Carmarthen to London Paddington
Delayed
10:04 London Paddington to Penzance
10:23 Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central
11:30 Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour
12:30 Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour
14:30 Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour
PollsOpen and recent polls
Closed 2024-03-25 Easter Escape - to where?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
March 28, 2024, 14:11:39 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[142] West Wiltshire Bus Changes April 2024
[80] would you like your own LIVE train station departure board?
[56] Return of the BRUTE?
[46] If not HS2 to Manchester, how will traffic be carried?
[43] Infrastructure problems in Thames Valley causing disruption el...
[34] Reversing Beeching - bring heritage and freight lines into the...
 
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 51 52 [53] 54 55 ... 63
  Print  
Author Topic: Class 387 coming to Thames Valley - ongoing discussion  (Read 459709 times)
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #780 on: January 04, 2018, 21:06:47 »

The Ribena bods are "Ambassadors"
Logged
Adelante_CCT
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1314



View Profile
« Reply #781 on: January 05, 2018, 19:58:14 »

Quote
Just need to see what happens on P13 between 1754 and 1820 this evening (maybe 2R53 and 2P71 are only 4 car), but it looks like the inherently less than optimally safe practice of platform sharing (ie trains sharing a platform without the protection of controlled signals) at Reading may have come to an end.  Hurray!

Well it would appear both the arrivals from Oxford and Paddington use P13, so I'm guessing 2R53 is only a 4 car?
Logged
ITGuy
Newbie
*
Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #782 on: January 05, 2018, 20:42:53 »

As a longtime Maidenhead-Paddington commuter who's been lurking here for a few months I thought I'd join in on this week's fun.

The 0733 actually arrived at MAI (Maidenhead station) on time this morning (1st time this week). It was packed as expected - looked like a dozen free seats per car. I got onto car 7 and stood for the trip. We arrived ~7 mins late. The previous version of this service was about 50% full (people stood when it was a 4 car 387). Prior to that it was a 6 car turbo (Henley train) that was always packed by the time it arrived at MAI. So after £millions spent we're back to where we started. Air con probably trumps comfy seats/1st class in the summer.

Evenings I get the 1819. This was only 8 cars this evening but as others have commented the rear 4 are largely a waste of time if they're not going to be platformed at MAI or TWY (Twyford station). I don't know how many people would use this train to go from PAD» (Paddington (London) - next trains) to Reading but I wouldn't have thought many. Either they need to extend the platforms or move the signal so that cars 3-10 are platformed instead of 1-8. That would allow the rear set to be useful and so spread people out. Never going to happen I know. Space wise it's the same crush as the 1818 this replaces.

What does look to be an improvement Shocked is that the abysmal 1842 PAD-MAI (ne Bourne End) has finally been killed off and replaced with a proper fast service. It's almost like having the long lamented 1833/1836 re-instated. Not sure about the 18:48 replacing the 1906.
Logged
Timmer
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6293


View Profile
« Reply #783 on: January 05, 2018, 21:03:30 »

A very warm welcome to the forum ITGuy and many thanks for your report on how things went for you this week.
Logged
Electric train
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4355


The future is 25000 Volts AC 750V DC has its place


View Profile
« Reply #784 on: January 06, 2018, 08:16:37 »

Evenings I get the 1819. This was only 8 cars this evening but as others have commented the rear 4 are largely a waste of time if they're not going to be platformed at MAI (Maidenhead station) or TWY (Twyford station). I don't know how many people would use this train to go from PAD» (Paddington (London) - next trains) to Reading but I wouldn't have thought many. Either they need to extend the platforms or move the signal so that cars 3-10 are platformed instead of 1-8. That would allow the rear set to be useful and so spread people out. Never going to happen I know. Space wise it's the same crush as the 1818 this replaces.

What does look to be an improvement Shocked is that the abysmal 1842 PAD-MAI (ne Bourne End) has finally been killed off and replaced with a proper fast service. It's almost like having the long lamented 1833/1836 re-instated. Not sure about the 18:48 replacing the 1906.


Maidenhead is planned to have extensions for 12 car trains, Twyford I do not believe is getting platform 4 extended due to the road bridge and connection to the branch, not sure about plat 3 if that is in the plan
Logged

Starship just experienced what we call a rapid unscheduled disassembly, or a RUD, during ascent,”
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7155


View Profile
« Reply #785 on: January 06, 2018, 11:10:53 »

Maidenhead is planned to have extensions for 12 car trains, Twyford I do not believe is getting platform 4 extended due to the road bridge and connection to the branch, not sure about plat 3 if that is in the plan

Twyford P3 is already 244 m long. Oddly, P2 is only 187 m long. P4 I think could be stretched just a little from its current 180 m, but the benefit/cost curve doesn't really support it (let alone 240 m).

PS: I see that P4 in the TPR (The Pensions Regulator) is 250 m long, presumably only available for a train coming off the branch. That's not mentioned in the Sectional Appendix, and does seem a bit - theoretical. More than that, isn't that curving platform edge not only useless but dangerous? Even if the carriages at that end don't open their doors, a passenger might want to lean across and try to open them. I'm surprised that part of the platform edge hasn't been taken up and fenced off; as I say it's not as if it's even going to be needed - or is there a plan for extending Henley to take a 12-car? (And of what stock?)
« Last Edit: January 06, 2018, 12:01:13 by stuving » Logged
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 10095


View Profile
« Reply #786 on: January 06, 2018, 12:20:56 »

With the signal on platform 3 at Twyford moved to the end of the platform, and a small extension which is ongoing it should be good for 12 cars within a few months (it virtually is now).  The same for platforms 1 and 2 where work is ongoing.  Platform 4 would cost an awful lot to extend as has been said - the only way to do it would be to replace the bridge at the London end, so it will probably stay as it is.  Like Stuving, I am surprised it is not fenced off.

So, with platform three already able to hold a 12 car (or, 11 at least) the only reason it is still SDO (Selective Door Opening) 8 is the length of other platforms, as the full ASDO (Automatic Selective Door Operation) system which automatically recognises what platform a train is at hasn’t been installed so the system limits it to 8 because of the length at other platforms.  Presumably that system will be deployed on 387s eventually otherwise the unextended platform 4 will continue to restrict them to SDO 8 regardless of platform.

Maidenhead has yet to see any extension works, ditto Slough (except for platform 4), So it will be a while yet before anything will change there.

If I was a commuter on the 17:49 or 18:19 for Maidenhead and Twyford I’d be getting a seat in carriage 9 or 10 and walking through.
Logged

To view my GWML (Great Western Main Line) Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1424


View Profile
« Reply #787 on: January 06, 2018, 13:23:44 »

P3 at Didcot will also be able to take a 12-car 387 when the extension to it is completed, although this work was originally aimed at 2*5 IETs (Intercity Express Train).
Logged
Electric train
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4355


The future is 25000 Volts AC 750V DC has its place


View Profile
« Reply #788 on: January 06, 2018, 15:28:10 »

With the signal on platform 3 at Twyford moved to the end of the platform, and a small extension which is ongoing it should be good for 12 cars within a few months (it virtually is now).  The same for platforms 1 and 2 where work is ongoing.  Platform 4 would cost an awful lot to extend as has been said - the only way to do it would be to replace the bridge at the London end, so it will probably stay as it is.  Like Stuving, I am surprised it is not fenced off.

So, with platform three already able to hold a 12 car (or, 11 at least) the only reason it is still SDO (Selective Door Opening) 8 is the length of other platforms, as the full ASDO (Automatic Selective Door Operation) system which automatically recognises what platform a train is at hasn’t been installed so the system limits it to 8 because of the length at other platforms.  Presumably that system will be deployed on 387s eventually otherwise the unextended platform 4 will continue to restrict them to SDO 8 regardless of platform.

Maidenhead has yet to see any extension works, ditto Slough (except for platform 4), So it will be a while yet before anything will change there.

If I was a commuter on the 17:49 or 18:19 for Maidenhead and Twyford I’d be getting a seat in carriage 9 or 10 and walking through.

My sources tell me that the platform extension work Maidenhead and west there off is being done by GWEP (Great Western Electrification Program) and not Crossrail.

I assume the reason nothing is done about the curved part of platform 4 at Twyford is the max length of passenger train cleared for the Henley branch, which I assume is a 5 car 165/6
Logged

Starship just experienced what we call a rapid unscheduled disassembly, or a RUD, during ascent,”
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7155


View Profile
« Reply #789 on: January 06, 2018, 15:56:28 »

My sources tell me that the platform extension work Maidenhead and west there off is being done by GWEP (Great Western Electrification Program) and not Crossrail.

I assume the reason nothing is done about the curved part of platform 4 at Twyford is the max length of passenger train cleared for the Henley branch, which I assume is a 5 car 165/6

But that's precisely why I though that curve was not needed. If a 5-car 165 won't (quite) fit in P5 (110m), it will in P4 without stopping round the bend. If it's going on- or off-shift to Reading, it needs to be clear of the points anyway. It's almost impossible to platform a train using the curve unless it has 12 carriages and is going to/from Henley.

As for who is responsible for the work - or more accurately who is responsible for not doing it - it's unclear and may not matter. Weren't NR» (Network Rail - home page) doing the "on-network" work for Crossrail anyway? The NR delivery plan isn't much help since it's so out of date (June 2016 for the "Thames Valley Electric Multiple Unit Capability Works"). However, it does say (and this dated June 2017) "The Crossrail project will deliver a new integrated railway route through central London from Reading and Heathrow in the west to Shenfield and Abbey Wood in the east". Which isn't what I understood, but as I say does it matter if neither has done it?
Logged
BBM
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 633


View Profile
« Reply #790 on: January 07, 2018, 14:44:44 »

I went to TWY (Twyford station) late this morning for a quick lunchtime trip to RDG(resolve) intending to get the 1202 departure (2N31 1115 PAD» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-DID» (Didcot Parkway - next trains)). I was rather surprised to see it come to a halt with the front of the train just ahead of the DR to UR crossover to the east of the station. At the same time 2P45 1155 RDG-PAD was approaching from the west but it came to a stand just before the points to the Henley branch.

There were no announcements at the station but checking GWR (Great Western Railway) Twitter it appeared that the delay was due to a 'safety inspection on a train'. Eventually 2P45 moved forward and departed P4 some 20 minutes late at slow speed past 2N31. A few minutes later that train moved forward into P3 with a lowered pantograph on the front unit. After another delay the train finally left TWY some 30 minutes late and terminated at RDG with the pantograph still down on the front unit.

Anyone know what happened?
« Last Edit: January 08, 2018, 09:48:08 by BBM » Logged
a-driver
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 965


View Profile
« Reply #791 on: January 08, 2018, 17:23:42 »

I went to TWY (Twyford station) late this morning for a quick lunchtime trip to RDG(resolve) intending to get the 1202 departure (2N31 1115 PAD» (Paddington (London) - next trains)-DID» (Didcot Parkway - next trains)). I was rather surprised to see it come to a halt with the front of the train just ahead of the DR to UR crossover to the east of the station. At the same time 2P45 1155 RDG-PAD was approaching from the west but it came to a stand just before the points to the Henley branch.

There were no announcements at the station but checking GWR (Great Western Railway) Twitter it appeared that the delay was due to a 'safety inspection on a train'. Eventually 2P45 moved forward and departed P4 some 20 minutes late at slow speed past 2N31. A few minutes later that train moved forward into P3 with a lowered pantograph on the front unit. After another delay the train finally left TWY some 30 minutes late and terminated at RDG with the pantograph still down on the front unit.

Anyone know what happened?


ADD (Automatic Dropping Device) activiation on 2N31. Driver had to inspect the pantograph on 2N31 for damage and I believe the driver of the following train carried out an OHL (Over-Head Line) inspection followed by an inspection by overhead line engineers.  No damage was found.
Logged
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1424


View Profile
« Reply #792 on: January 10, 2018, 10:39:16 »

From journey check a 387 has been turbo-stuted today: 'more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time' ...
Logged
a-driver
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 965


View Profile
« Reply #793 on: January 10, 2018, 11:07:59 »

From journey check a 387 has been turbo-stuted today: 'more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time' ...

41 387’s are required with a fleet size of 42.
Logged
Timmer
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6293


View Profile
« Reply #794 on: January 10, 2018, 11:19:20 »

41 387’s are required with a fleet size of 42.
That's way too tight. Are there still more to come from Derby?
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 ... 51 52 [53] 54 55 ... 63
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page