Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register and contribute [here] - it's free.
 today - PEW / Broad Gauge (1)
today - ORR Station Usage figures out
13/12/2018 - ACoRP AGM
17/12/2018 - Removal of Severn Bridge Tolls
22/12/2018 - Christmas service changes
04/01/2019 - Look forward - 2019 Severnside
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
December 11, 2018, 10:26:01 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[96] Crossrail - The Elizabeth Line - ongoing discussion, merged to...
[88] Station Usage figures from the ORR
[66] Closure of Old Oak Common (81A) December 2018
[46] MetroBus
[44] Passengers trapped on train for over 6 hours
[40] Cotswold Line - 2018 cancellation and amendments log
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6
  Print  
Author Topic: 165/166s on this route  (Read 4199 times)
IndustryInsider
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6834


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: August 01, 2018, 05:12:41 pm »

It lasted a matter or weeks when they first came out!  Then the refit five or so years ago helped and the majority worked for a while, but they seem to have given up trying to maintain them recently so I reckon only a third, perhaps less, of carriages now work.

The system being progressively fitted to the Class 165s does seem much better though and Iíve only once known one not working, which was fine again after the circuit breaker was reset.
Logged

To view my cab run over the new Reading Viaduct as well as a relief line cab ride at Reading just after Platforms 12-15 opened and my 'before and after' video comparison of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/1
devonexpress
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 294


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: August 23, 2018, 12:44:32 pm »

The best thing to do is to write a letter to the department for transport about how uncomfortable and practical it is, the more people that complain about it now, the more likely it will be put as a requirement in the new franchise.

Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 22895



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #17 on: August 29, 2018, 05:42:41 pm »

Details in the attached that was sent by NR to local residents.

From the attached letter ... talking about Bedwyn services - typically 72 minutes to Paddington

Quote
The IETs provide  These will all help to give passengers a more comfortable journey. At peak times, to supplement the through service, there will be existing diesel trains operating to Newbury alongside the new IETs.

I fully accept that the "existing diesel trains" are fine for shorter suburban journeys, but it strikes me that Network Rail and GWR who sent this letter have dual standards - for they are talking about making a 72 minute journey much more comfortable with modern, fit-for-purpose trains - yet sending the old ones which they're admitting really aren't up to snuff for such a journey to Cardiff, where they'll be making 200 minute runs to Portsmouth.

Wouldn't it make sense to provide trains with "more seats and tables in standard class, efficient air conditioning systems and a digital reservation system." on the 200 minute run?

Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Member of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and some more things besides
devonexpress
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 294


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: August 29, 2018, 07:49:26 pm »

Details in the attached that was sent by NR to local residents.

From the attached letter ... talking about Bedwyn services - typically 72 minutes to Paddington

Quote
The IETs provide  These will all help to give passengers a more comfortable journey. At peak times, to supplement the through service, there will be existing diesel trains operating to Newbury alongside the new IETs.

I fully accept that the "existing diesel trains" are fine for shorter suburban journeys, but it strikes me that Network Rail and GWR who sent this letter have dual standards - for they are talking about making a 72 minute journey much more comfortable with modern, fit-for-purpose trains - yet sending the old ones which they're admitting really aren't up to snuff for such a journey to Cardiff, where they'll be making 200 minute runs to Portsmouth.

Wouldn't it make sense to provide trains with "more seats and tables in standard class, efficient air conditioning systems and a digital reservation system." on the 200 minute run?



Personally I would have rather had the Class 180s being moved over to the Cardiff - Portsmouth route, fixed 5 coach units and perfect for the job.
Logged
Charlie (in Gloucester)
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 287


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: August 29, 2018, 08:10:52 pm »

I do hope there are new train on the line for next franchise, a 7 year newer train is no upgrade in technology, iím many ways is a downgrade on the interior side. More reservations, more seats (that are comfortable) and better seating patterns.
Logged

Regular GWR user between Gloucester and Swindon.
devonexpress
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 294


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: August 29, 2018, 08:23:00 pm »

I do hope there are new train on the line for next franchise, a 7 year newer train is no upgrade in technology, iím many ways is a downgrade on the interior side. More reservations, more seats (that are comfortable) and better seating patterns.

From the franchise consultation, there are a few option, but new trains will be explored. Don't forget that some TOC's will offer to buy them to win the franchise anyway.    The other options are the D stock modified trains for branchlines, and other stock having units to reduce engine emissions.
Logged
bignosemac
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 16268


Question everything.


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: August 30, 2018, 09:44:52 am »

Personally I would have rather had the Class 180s being moved over to the Cardiff - Portsmouth route, fixed 5 coach units and perfect for the job.

They aren't cleared to run between Westbury and Portsmouth.
Logged

Time flies by when you're a driver of a train,
Speeding out of Trumpton with a cargo of cocaine.
Richard Fairhurst
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 704


View Profile Email
« Reply #22 on: August 30, 2018, 10:09:36 am »

Personally I would have rather had the Class 180s being moved over to the Cardiff - Portsmouth route, fixed 5 coach units and perfect for the job.

Is there much 125mph track between Cardiff and Portsmouth?

(The 175s are likely to become available in 2021/2022, of course, and half the 185 fleet is without a home...)
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 22895



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #23 on: August 30, 2018, 10:47:44 am »

Personally I would have rather had the Class 180s being moved over to the Cardiff - Portsmouth route, fixed 5 coach units and perfect for the job.

Is there much 125mph track between Cardiff and Portsmouth?

(The 175s are likely to become available in 2021/2022, of course, and half the 185 fleet is without a home...)

Not thrilled with the idea of moving 2 and 3 car units without through corridors (175 and 185) onto Cardiff - Portsmouth.   I was tongue in cheek suggesting 80x - though that's the logic that comes from GWR and NR's letters to the folks of the upper Kennet valley about the Bedwyn turn back.

As passenger numbers grow / have grown, 1 car needs have become 2 - 3 car needs, and 2 - 3 car needs become 4 - 5 car needs.  And that's a serious issue where there's a lack of through gangways.    Saying you're increasing capacity by 25% by putting 5 seats across where there were four is naughty / inappropriate for journeys of over an hour (that Bedwyn letter again!).   And if you're going to couple up two trains into a larger one, there's an awfully big financial temptation for any operator (be it First group or another) to hire a bare minimum based on optimistic availability and run short forms far too often.
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Member of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and some more things besides
Richard Fairhurst
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 704


View Profile Email
« Reply #24 on: August 30, 2018, 11:01:05 am »

All 175 coaches are powered, so in theory you might be able to re-form 2x 3-coach as one 4-coach and one 2-coach, though no doubt it would require some head-scratching engineering.

Long-distance regional lines like this are always a bit of a cinderella - destined to be getting cast-offs forever, unless a Fairy Godmother arrives (like the Welsh Assembly...). The glut of new-build orders over the past few years, coupled with the first signs of a ridership downturn in several parts of the network, means that there'll be a lot of fairly recent units going spare.

(The next CrossCountry franchise is going to be particularly interesting from a rolling stock POV!)
Logged
tramway
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 617



View Profile
« Reply #25 on: August 30, 2018, 11:24:13 am »

Personally I would have rather had the Class 180s being moved over to the Cardiff - Portsmouth route, fixed 5 coach units and perfect for the job.

Is there much 125mph track between Cardiff and Portsmouth?

(The 175s are likely to become available in 2021/2022, of course, and half the 185 fleet is without a home...)

Not a great deal of that on the Edinburgh circular but we're using 67's top and tailed. HST with DVT anyone?
Logged
Lee
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6260

He who laughs last hasn't got all the facts.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #26 on: August 30, 2018, 02:45:34 pm »

Assuming there don't turn out to be any insurmountable obstacles to clearing them, Portsmouth-Cardiff could turn out to be one of the few routes where there could actually be many advantages to introducing 5-coach IET's :

- They could use their electric capabilities under the wires for part of the journey.

- The seating configuration vs capacity balance would be seen as superior to the Turbos.

- Portsmouth-Cardiff passengers are used to trolley service with no hot food.

- One day there may be something that's genuinely seen as better aircon and consistent digital reservations.

- They would enable First Class to be introduced on the route that came top of the list of "routes provided by respondents where First Class accommodation should be provided" in the DfT GWR Franchise Stakeholder Briefing Document - http://gwr.passenger.chat/gwf_consult_output.pdf

Assuming that nicking the IET's off Bedwyn ultimately leaves them reliant on 769's or something else we rigged up with a couple of loo rolls and some stickyback plastic, then we could always extend the London-Bedwyn services to Pewsey, Westbury and Frome as proposed by TransWilts to compensate ( https://www.transwilts.org/berks-and-hants ) and open Devizes Parkway (number 7 on the list of "schemes with a prospect of being funded cited by respondents" in the DfT GWR Franchise Stakeholder Briefing Document) to boot...
Logged

Currently muddling along the Guingamp-Carhaix line

http://twitter.com/research_gwchat
Adelante_CCT
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1178



View Profile
« Reply #27 on: August 30, 2018, 03:12:39 pm »

Use the 769s on the Cardiff to Portsmouth run instead, that way they can make full use of their tri-mode capabilities!
Logged
Clan Line
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 120



View Profile
« Reply #28 on: August 30, 2018, 03:25:46 pm »

    Saying you're increasing capacity by 25% by putting 5 seats across where there were four is naughty / inappropriate for journeys of over an hour (that Bedwyn letter again!).   

"more than naughty/inappropriate" - I call it insulting  Angry
Logged
Timmer
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4866


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: August 30, 2018, 03:45:44 pm »

Iím pleased to see the Cardiff-Portsmouth line topped the list of where First class should be provided. I think there is a market for it and with 5 carriage trains about to start operating on this route enough seating capacity to do so.
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 ... 6
  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 a customer 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). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants