Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum [home] and [about]
November lockdown advice
Forum in and beyond Coronavirus
DfT Covid Travel Advice
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 today - Tuesday Club - ONLINE
04/12/20 - TWSW AGM - ONLINE
09/12/20 - Community Rail Network Awards
13/01/21 - Melksham RUG - ONLINE
Random Image
Train Running Polls Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail news GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
November 24, 2020, 12:27:36 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
[106] 24th November 1940
[90] Expansion of SWR services to Swindon and Okehampton?
[77] Westbury to Swindon video, 1988
[77] HS2 - Government proposals, alternative routes and general dis...
[66] RMT Demands withdrawal of patronising GWR hi vis cleaning vest...
[55] Network Rail fined for allowing trains to use storm-damaged vi...
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: Scrapping HSTs instead of relieving voyagers  (Read 4230 times)
simonw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 576


View Profile Email
« Reply #15 on: December 17, 2019, 09:31:34 am »

Surely the Cross Country capacity issue does not cover the whole network, but certain corridors.

From me perspective, virtually every Cross Country I have ever got on the Bristol to Birmingham route has been overcrowded, whether

  • turbostar
  • voyager
  • super voyager

with crowding compounded with excess

  • luggage
  • prams
  • cycles
  • scooters

The whole franchise needs looking at. The mix of commuter and long distance traveller is not well catered for.

As a fix for our area, I would like to see GWR run regular Bristol - Birmingham and Bristol - Plymouth services to take pressure (compete) with Cross Country.
Logged
chopper1944
Full Member
***
Posts: 43


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: December 17, 2019, 11:28:45 am »

I agree with Simonw, with GWR trains using the Camp Hill line and a spur to Moor Street at Bordesley
Logged
onthecushions
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 824


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: December 17, 2019, 12:49:48 pm »


It was the same in pre-Voyager, pre-HST days with loco hauled, 7 car Mk2 sets. Every coach into B'ham was full, including from the Oxford line.

What about GWR/WC Bi-modes, open access to Manchester?

OTC



Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 31220



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #18 on: February 06, 2020, 10:23:59 am »

From Rail Magazine

Quote
Decisions on the future of stored High Speed Trains will be made in the near future, after the first seven Mk 3s were sent for scrap

Quote
A Porterbrook spokesman told RAIL that those moved west were a “trial scrapping” but confirmed that discussions needed to be made regarding the other vehicles stored at Long Marston and Laira. He said it was likely that some of those in better condition would be re-used, but that many would be scrapped.
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3450



View Profile
« Reply #19 on: February 06, 2020, 03:33:33 pm »

It does seem very shortsighted to scrap HSTs whilst capacity remains such a problem.
HSTs are old and rapidly becoming non-standard, but SHORT TERM retention of a modest number would seem to be more sensible than rushing to scrap them.
Cross country voyagers are still overcrowded.
Short formed IETs are still a regular feature.

It would in my view be reasonable to grant a derogation regarding disabled facilities.
I would argue that an HST with seats to spare, is in practical terms a lot more accessible than a crush loaded half length DMU.
I rather doubt that a wheelchair user could even board a crush loaded IET, let alone get to the universal toilet, or to the wheelchair space. Booking wont help as bookings are voided on short formed units.
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 is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
MVR S&T
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 272


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: February 06, 2020, 09:05:36 pm »

The same rules that allow 442s to run on SWR then...
Logged
southwest
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 151


View Profile Email
« Reply #21 on: June 04, 2020, 06:25:33 pm »

It does seem very shortsighted to scrap HSTs whilst capacity remains such a problem.
HSTs are old and rapidly becoming non-standard, but SHORT TERM retention of a modest number would seem to be more sensible than rushing to scrap them.
Cross country voyagers are still overcrowded.
Short formed IETs are still a regular feature.

It would in my view be reasonable to grant a derogation regarding disabled facilities.
I would argue that an HST with seats to spare, is in practical terms a lot more accessible than a crush loaded half length DMU.
I rather doubt that a wheelchair user could even board a crush loaded IET, let alone get to the universal toilet, or to the wheelchair space. Booking wont help as bookings are voided on short formed units.

It does seem crazy that ex LNER hst's which have exactly the same interior as XC are sitting idle. Although Coronavirus has had a massive impact, when things get back to normal these voyagers could be replaced. If EMR can get dispensation until 2022 why can't XC? The government seems intent on keeping the voyager fleet within XC rather than making Arriva buy IET's or something better.

Although I suspect if the Voyagers do get freed up Grand Central will take them on to replace its 180s.
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]
  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

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page