SWT▸ had a bigger budget and better refurb spec,also the maintainence is far superior to FGW▸ probably because they only have one class of train to look after and more spare sets so can stop them for repairs etc.
Yes, but let's not forget that the franchise bid, by Alison Forster and her First team, set the budget and also the number of trains they needed - so that although you are, I'm sure, on the right track it's through choice of the companies concerned and not just down to the luck of the draw. First chose to squeeze budgets, and to squeeze passengers.
Didn't SWT used to run some 170 units (?) from Salisbury too? Was the maintainance there os a significantly lower standard before they switched to a nearer-uniform fleet of just two classes - 158s and 159s?
And on a positive note for FGW, let's remember how well Exeter have done with 142s, and that the present incumbents in most FGW roles are not the same people who were at the front and making the bid that they're delivering until 2016 even if they were with the company elsewhere.
now you come to mention it the 170's were looked after to same standard as the 159's,so it must be a number of reasons.
with the odd exception swt diesels end at a depot every day.
more scope to stop units for repairs
more skilled enthusiastic workforce maybe?
also exeter have done a fantastic job on clapped out pacers lets hope once they take on the 143's the reliability of them improves,as train crew i see all the time the shortcomings of
SPM▸ far too many team leader informed,no fault found or for mobile to ride responses in defect books to faults train crew have reported.also worth noting that the good old canton trick of changing repair book is becoming more common with these now
