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, 14:11:37 *
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 [2] 3 4 ... 7
  Print  
Author Topic: Rolling stock now oldest since 2001 ... GWR oldest diesels of the lot!  (Read 28128 times)
Tim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2738


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: October 29, 2015, 11:26:42 »

I'm now a regular user of CrossCountry Voyagers thanks to same day Advances undercutting the walk up tickets, and CrossCountry's 10 Minute Reservation system if I'm using a Rover or walk up ticket.

I used to be on the 'Voyagers are crap' bandwagon, but with regular use of them I've changed my opinion. I'm now more than happy to use them.

Is that not just a way of saying that they are not good enough to be worth a relatively high ticket price?  A devalued product might be acceptable at a devalued price. 

I am a fan of XC (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) staff (they generally seem happy and motivated and give the impression of enjoying their jobs).  But the trains are poor IMHO (in my humble opinion)
Logged
Tim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2738


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: October 29, 2015, 11:35:48 »


Elsewhere on these forums I have been very critical of the new IEPs (Intercity Express Program / Project.), my objections could be summarised by saying that I expect them to be too similar to voyagers.


I have concerns about the IEP, but I don't expect that they will be anywhere near as bad as the voyagers, based on my experience of the Javelin trains.

The main problem with the Voyagers if lack of space because the body shell was designed with tilt in mind even though the 220s never tilted (and I don't think the 221s do now).  Coupled with an unnecessary number of massive toilets, you only get something like 40 to 50 seats per coach and then only 3 or 4 Standard class coaches which is just not enough and rather similar in capacity to something like a  3 car 158/159.
Logged
Timmer
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6293


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: October 29, 2015, 11:54:40 »

I have concerns about the IEP (Intercity Express Program / Project.), but I don't expect that they will be anywhere near as bad as the voyagers, based on my experience of the Javelin trains.
Agreed.

Regarding Voyagers, their cousins the Meridians showed that you could improve on the original Voyager concept, though if travelling on East Midlands trains I always aim to travel on an HST (High Speed Train).

Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7155


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: October 29, 2015, 12:15:57 »

From the passengers point of view, voyagers were one of biggest downgrades ever. A popular newspaper at the time stated that the then Virgin cross country "had been given a record subsidy to halve the length of the trains"
Prior to the voyager fiasco, a few doubters expressed doubts about half length trains without sufficient luggage space or a proper buffet, such doubts were drowned out by the "shorter DMUs (Diesel Multiple Unit) are wonderful" brigade. Though of course "shorter" is not a term that should be applied to new trains ! "flexible" sounds so much better.

It is now fairly widely accepted that voyagers are not as wonderful as was promised, but no one is going to scrap relatively new trains so we are stuck with the wretched things for years.

I think there are several things being mixed together here.

One is the "promise". I'm not sure there's much point in comparing a new product of any kind with the vacuous marketing pitch made for it at or before introduction. You could do the same with anything - shoes, ice cream, mortgages, holidays, governments - and get much the same result. It might tell you a lot about marketing (though only what you already know) but not much about the product. I'd ask what reasonable expectations were not delivered.

Then in this case there is the trains' lengths, but remember why those shorter trains were chosen. I can remember the explanation: that the service interval would be halved. In round numbers that was from 1 tph to 2 tph for the core, and 0.5 tph to 1 tph for most of the rest. I'm not sure how close to that the actual service change came, but a quick look at a 2000 timetable suggests it was broadly achieved.

That in turn was based on the observation that the majority of customers, however you measure that, were doing short not long journeys. Also, as a lot of them were connecting to or from other local service, a higher frequency was a lot more valuable to them than a longer train.

If you want the same number of trains but longer, that's a matter of total capacity versus cost, which is a different question and a different kind of question.

Finally, of course, there is the detailed design of the trains, which may indeed merit criticism. From my earlier remarks you could say they are long-distance trains but not, on average, full of long-distance passengers. But, as this thread (before it digressed somewhat) has shown, relying on averages can be a mistake. Efficiency, such as in the allocation of space in a train, conflicts (in general) with flexibility, such as coping with a wide range of mixes of passenger types.
Logged
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1424


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: October 29, 2015, 13:30:00 »

Chris Green on the overcrowding on the introduction of Voyagers:
Quote
The underlying cause of the overcrowding was a massive growth in short term travel on the route which we designed as a long-distance route.... We have learnt some tough lessons on overcrowding, particularly overcrowding on a congested railway. I think we have also demonstrated that introducing a fast, frequent service of new trains does attract a lot of new passengers, so the challenge is how to maintain this upward trend at a slower growth rate so we have time to match demand with capacity.
Some of those challenges may reoccur although there were particular issue met with the intention to double frequencies over much of the XC (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) network in particular that it was too much in some cases the infrastructure couldn't cope. The principal difficulty with the short term travel on a long distance train is dealing with the peaks - at a particular station everyone might want say the 17:30 and the fact that there is another in half an hour instead of an hour is of no consequence.

Some parts of the XC network did not have an increased frequency as it was not possible. An example was Leamington Spa to Birmingham via Coventry.

I think the "challenge ... to maintain this upward trend at a slower growth rate" was in the end met on XC by choking off the cheapest fares.
Logged
John R
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4416


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: October 29, 2015, 14:15:23 »

A few points which may be relevant.

Yes, many services had an increased frequency but some, most notably Bristol to Plymouth were very quickly reduced back to the previous one, resulting in less capacity than had previously been the case.

The new trains were relatively inefficient in the amount of seats they offered, partly due to all the toilets being accessible (in part due to the original plan of having three classes, all of which would have an accessible toilet), and the fact that in a four car set there are two cabs/crash free zones, and (as built) one buffet in such a short set.  So two four car sets doesn't equal an eight vehicle HST (High Speed Train) or loco hauled set.

Finally, most people have forgotten but the franchise was awarded on the promise of loco hauled sets, which mysteriously became units by the time the stock was ordered. Hmmm...

 
Logged
Rhydgaled
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1500


View Profile WWW
« Reply #21 on: October 29, 2015, 15:44:56 »

the 220s never tilted (and I don't think the 221s do now)
I think the suituation with 221s is that Virgin's still tilt but XC (Cross Country Trains (franchise))'s don't.

Coupled with an unnecessary number of massive toilets, you only get something like 40 to 50 seats per coach and then only 3 or 4 Standard class coaches which is just not enough and rather similar in capacity to something like a  3 car 158/159.
With the Great Western IEP (Intercity Express Program / Project.) and class 802 fleets there are fewer accessible toilets, but most units will only have roughly the equivilent of 4 standard class coaches (depending on what unit you are comparing them to, a 222 has over 65 seats in some coaches I think while 175s only have around 50).

The new trains were relatively inefficient in the amount of seats they offered, partly due to all the toilets being accessible (in part due to the original plan of having three classes, all of which would have an accessible toilet), and the fact that in a four car set there are two cabs/crash free zones, and (as built) one buffet in such a short set.  So two four car sets doesn't equal an eight vehicle HST (High Speed Train) or loco hauled set.
Which is another thing the GW (Great Western)'s 800s will have in common with Voyagers, in terms of seating capacity a 10-car 800 (2x 5-car) will only have 1 more seat than the 9-car class 801s I seem to recall.
Logged

----------------------------
Don't DOO (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) it, keep the guard (but it probably wouldn't be a bad idea if the driver unlocked the doors on arrival at calling points).
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #22 on: October 29, 2015, 15:51:47 »

I think so - there'll be twice the 1st class capacity of course in 2x800s
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5398



View Profile
« Reply #23 on: October 30, 2015, 10:14:41 »

You've got to love the duplicity from the unions, particularly the RMT (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers). Moaning about the age of rolling stock while at the same time striking over the introduction of new stock.  Roll Eyes

It is not the stock per se they object to it is the placement of the door controls within reach of the driver.  I am sure that the dispute would end if GWR (Great Western Railway) plated over them

And provided a buffet  Smiley
Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #24 on: October 30, 2015, 10:20:24 »

Only to protect the staff, not the buffet per se
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #25 on: October 31, 2015, 10:28:20 »

Further comment on this story at

http://transwilts.org/tw/news/128-gwr-fleet-among-the-oldest-in-the-country

with a link to a radio interview with Dan Panes of  Great Western Railway on the subject, with a 'counter view' provided by a member of the rail user community.
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
JayMac
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 18894



View Profile
« Reply #26 on: October 31, 2015, 13:03:41 »

]with a 'counter view' provided by a member of the rail user community.

Very modest of you grahame!

It was very disappointing to here Dan Panes (cf First Group) talking about the investment we are making in new rolling stock. Remind me Dan - how much are First Group paying for the Class 800/801/802s?

And grahame, were you really speaking on behalf of TWSW» (TravelWatch SouthWest - website)?
Logged

"Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for the rest of the day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."

- Sir Terry Pratchett.
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #27 on: October 31, 2015, 13:05:03 »

]with a 'counter view' provided by a member of the rail user community.

Very modest of you grahame!

It was very disappointing to here Dan Panes (cf First Group) talking about the investment we are making in new rolling stock. Remind me Dan - how much are First Group paying for the Class 800/801/802s?

Quite a lot of money involved in hiring the beasts actually. It's still investing as it's *far* more than the HSTs (High Speed Train)/turbos etc cost....
Logged
JayMac
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 18894



View Profile
« Reply #28 on: October 31, 2015, 13:39:12 »

You invest for a return. Investment involves purchasing an asset. Paying a lease fee is not investment. And it may not even be First Group paying the lease fees after 2019.

The investment is being made by HMG and the ROSCOs» (Rolling Stock Owning Company - about).
Logged

"Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for the rest of the day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."

- Sir Terry Pratchett.
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #29 on: October 31, 2015, 14:13:15 »

Even when the full cost (plus a likely profit) is being paid by ToC(s).....hmmm, debatable
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 [2] 3 4 ... 7
  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