Great Western Coffee Shop

Dipping into the BBC Local News revealed the following-

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-56902528

Perhaps some of our industry insiders have more information? It's just as well this has come to light (and hopefully will be resolved) in current circumstances when traffic is light.

It doesn't sound like anything more than you might expect from a new train.  A bit more detail here, with poster Clarence Yard explaining the situation very well (as always) on the second page...

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/gwr-withdraw-some-800s-due-to-cracks-in-yaw-damper-bolsters.216705/

If this was an isolated problem,  I would be at least somewhat forgiving.
However taken together with all the other faults and failures, these are starting to look pretty rubbish.

Failure to couple and uncouple reliably, despite this being an "essential requirement"
Failure to cope with the waves at Dawlish, also an "essential requirement"
Overheating in hot weather.
Poor ride.
Unreliable toilets.
Unreliable reservations.
Poor quality trim and fittings.

And a general failure to meet the required levels of availability that resulted in frequent short formations, forgotten about  with the reduced passenger numbers in the pandemic. But no doubt to return.

The poor standards of passenger comfort and facilities are arguably due to the TOC policy of "what downgrades can we get away with" and not Hitachi's fault, but still gives a poor impression.

I agree, this is a most serious failure IF the reports are accurate, which PERHAPS they are not.
I would expect reports in the national press, but not aware of any such.
And howls of outrage from the RMT, not aware of that either.

The opening or releasing of doors ONLY on the wrong side, might imply operator error, but the releasing of doors on BOTH sides suggests a serious defect as this AFAIK cant be done by mistake.

Roger Ford has an article in Modern Railways (next month's, presumably) about the repairs now being tested by Hitachi on 802007. This is available to read on line (https://www.modernrailways.com/article/800-series-hitachis-remedial-mods-break-cover) free but rationed. In his e-preview he says:

So the next thing to look out for is the decision to go ahead with repairs (or not!), and then the plan to do it, how many units will be out of the fleet at a time, and how long it's all going to take. And eventually whether it's really sorted the problem.

Note that the reports refers to the IETs as being "DMUs"  I seem to recall being criticized for referring to them thus, with IET supporters stating that they are not REALLY DMUs but actually something else.
It was suggested that DMU was a negative term that people linked with shorter trains, no catering, and general downgrading.

Moving on from that, I thought that new trains suffered from cracks in three locations, these proposed repairs would only seem to deal with only one such set of cracks.

I presume that hitachi are not paying any significant compensation for the ongoing lack of availability of these trains. Or providing some extra units free of charge to make up for this.

Meanwhile 5 car units instead of full length HSTs are the new normal, better get used to it, as Cross Country customers have got used to the reduced capacity of new trains.

I have heard reports of such an incident, I can’t remember if it was on GWR or another TOC. All doors released correctly on one side of the train but the TMS showed a door had also incorrectly released on the wrong side of the train. I can’t remember if door buttons armed or wether it was just a TMS glitch.

I did see 802007 out and about on a test run in January - you can see the modifications and sensors attached to them which were feeding an army of laptops and boffins information via cables that run through the adjacent doors.

ORR have published their final report, plus related material (https://www.orr.gov.uk/guidance-compliance/rail/health-safety/passenger-safety/orr-review-hitachi-class-800-series-cracking-issue), on the Hitachi train cracking problems.

This does explain in some detail what happened, both in the organisations involved and in the train bodies. It doesn't address (and probably never could) some of the "why" questions, such as why the corrosion environment for Japanese trains does not lead to stress corrosion cracking. The contribution of track, as worn, and wheels, ditto, to the anti-roll bar and yaw damper motion and forces is also still a big vague.

The outcome is a six-year rolling repair plan for all the affected trains, including some bits (e.g. coupler mountings) where cracking was only found in the later more through investigations.

They also display a rather touching belief that more standards would prevent such things happening.

A SIX YEAR rolling program of repairs presumably means ANOTHER six years of short formed trains and reduced services. And that is optimistically presuming that the repair process runs smoothly and to time.

The rush to scrap existing stock means that opportunities to use alternative rolling stock will be very limited.

I cynically assume that Hitachi will not be paying compensation for their failure to meet the promised availability.

And after this multi year rectification process, they will still be nasty suburban units unsuited to inter city routes.

Obviously the more you do at once the shorter the overall time, and vice versa. The practical limit of units that can be under repair at a time is also obvious: one. The programme is described as:
That's four and a bit vehicles per week. For some reason the work is going to be done at Arlington Fleet Services at Eastleigh, where there will be two repair lines. Whether that means doing one five-car at a time in a week, or two units at once and taking longer, I can only guess. Further details revealed are:


True, but that's the world of fashion, isn't it?


I wonder. Obviously the whole repair programme is Hitachi's cost, and they have not been paid for trains not presented to the TOC as required in the TARA. But clearly a refund of the lease cost per diagram is inadequate compensation; it's not as if GWR can whip out their StockShop app and hire an alternative unit for the day. I imagine the TOCs (or in practice DfT) would have a legal case for breach of contract. That would depend on what's in the TARA and MARA, and I suspect in the blacked out bits.

Had most of the HSTs not been scrapped in such a hurry, then alternative trains WOULD have been available.

Presumably hitachi staff are not going on strike.
And will therefore be able to use the strike days to catch up on routine maintenance.
Over 30 short formations again today.

There were over-running engineering works in the BPW area earlier this morning which may well have affected the Hitachi depot

Nearly 40 half length IETs today, and not one comment on these forums. Presumably this is the new normal and not newsworthy. "new trains are shorter, get used to it"

05:23 London Paddington to Swansea due 08:58
05:51 Bristol Temple Meads to Portsmouth Harbour due 08:27
06:20 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington due 08:29
06:28 Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour due 09:53
07:31 Gloucester to Bristol Temple Meads due 08:27
07:33 Severn Beach to Weston-Super-Mare due 09:00
08:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 09:35
08:20 London Paddington to Oxford due 09:18
08:32 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 10:05
08:45 Great Malvern to Westbury due 11:32
09:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 10:39
09:10 Weston-Super-Mare to Severn Beach due 10:23
09:10 Bristol Temple Meads to Avonmouth due 09:39
09:23 Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central due 12:45
09:23 Swansea to London Paddington due 12:12
09:46 Avonmouth to Weston-Super-Mare due 11:00
09:59 Oxford to London Paddington due 10:54
10:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 11:36
10:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 12:08
11:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 12:38
11:20 London Paddington to Oxford due 12:13
12:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 13:39
12:31 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:06
12:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 15:31
13:02 Oxford to London Paddington due 13:54
13:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:35
14:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 15:36
14:18 London Paddington to Cardiff Central due 16:07
14:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 16:07
15:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 16:39
15:23 Swansea to London Paddington due 18:14
16:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 17:35
16:23 Swansea to London Paddington due 19:14
16:33 London Paddington to Taunton due 19:12
16:54 Cardiff Central to London Paddington due 18:44
17:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 18:40
18:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 20:08
18:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 21:33
19:18 London Paddington to Swansea due 22:17
19:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 22:34
20:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 23:50
0 Catering Updates

A long list agreed - but not all of those are IET services.

And, as usual, the list is now inaccurate.

From a passenger POV, the length of the train doesn't really matter - it's an implementation detail. What matters is whether you can get a seat or not.

Indeed.....

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/1000bri.jpg)

By chance there is a photo taken aboard the 10:00 ex Bristol Temple Meads on Twitter.

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/1000bri2.jpg)

It's rather like mass cancellations every Sunday......initially it's so poor it's shocking, but gradually poor service becomes the normal expectation.

Great environment to assist with the resurgence  of COVID on the short formed train pictured too.

Worth noting that the first Class 80x has only just gone in for remedial work to repair the cracking problem.

Partly agree as this is indeed wildly dependent on implementation - which includes subtleties like "Avoid booking passengers into seats in the part of the train from which they cannot alight at their destination' and 'Activate the seat reservations before the train is at the platform at its starting station'.

There's also the instances when one half of a ten car set is heavily loaded and the other half with plenty of space - though as passengers have learned through experience at say Paddington, have they become more adept at putting themselves aboard on the half that has seats available? It's really difficult for the TOC to hit the balance.

Underlying this, travellers experiencing loading factors approaching or exceeding the seating capacity in any part of a run in a 5 car set will send the message that the system is capacity constrained, which will inhibit future growth in passenger numbers as people with a choice will use another travel mode - and others who are travelling with family, children or who have a disability may be heavily discouraged from using rail. With a capacity of just 290 or is it 254 seated in standard, an hourly 5 car IET on its own isn't a great heavy lifter.

At what level of occupancy does a TOC regard a long distance train as full to capacity? That's probably a different figure from the one at which a passenger would consider it full.

Mark

This is nothing new and not unique to ten car sets.  It happens often on 9-car sets, and used to happen often on HST's where passengers are/were able walk through the whole train.  I frequently see standing room only in 'J' and on the same train one man and his dog sat in 'A'. 

It even happens when crew make announcements pretty much pleading with people to move down the train...obviously a human behaviour thing.

The 12:31 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads was actually 9 coaches - I was on it.

1. It's interesting to see in places loadings along a train showing up on the platform displays showing where the space is. I recall it on Thameslink - so rarely on an an IET these days not sure if we have such a system like this on our London trains

2. Wasn't the "10 car scheme" on the Southern out of Cannon Street and Charing Cross to Hayes, Dartford and Sevenoaks something of a flop because the extra two carriages didn't get many passengers as they were so far from the terminal barriers (some bright spark suggesting that the two carriages should have been added at the London end!)

3.  ;D I could not help wondering if the dog in your example was smelly or agressive (I know not - that it's a serious point)

I think two or three of the diagrams are now back to full length, so a dozen or so trains.  That’s not to say it’s not a bad day for IET availability, just like we have good and bad days for DMU availability as well.

Everyone can now check formations for themselves on RTT of course (100x more accurate than Journeycheck) so I won’t bother with a list.

Another bad IET day today. 31 short formations in total, of which 28 look to be half capacity IETs.
And AFAIK there were a few more short formations earlier today that have completed their journey and are therefore no longer shown.

And yes I am aware that IET advocates will point out that some might actually run full length, and that the odd bad day is to be expected.

Loadings are available on the GWR app (see Bob’s post from yesterday).  Perhaps in time that information will be available on the departure screens at stations?  Though I’m not sure it’ll be much use in terms of a live boarding situation at an origin station like Paddington.  Better for providing information at points en-route I’d have thought?

An advantage of the IETs over HSTs is that crew can use the passenger count facility and the live CCTV monitors to check where space is available and advise passengers.  Though like I said it’s rare for many to take heed of such advice.

The dog in my example was beautifully behaved.  ;)

Veering slightly off topic, how are the loadings calculated?   Are there sensors as people pass through the doors or does it base things on the average weight of a passenger?   I am just thinking if someone boards in coach C but then walks through to coach B, how are the statistics calculated?

Providing loading information at stations might be useful, but is not an acceptable substitute for running full length trains.

If such information IS provided then will passengers with "booked train only" tickets be allowed to use a latter train at no extra expense ?
And if travel on a later GWR service IS allowed, what about connections onto non GWR services. Will Cross Country for example  allow passengers to use a later than booked train if the passenger misses the booked train due to overcrowding on the GWR service.

And what about travel EARLIER than otherwise permitted ?
Passenger has a ticket valid only after 09-30 and arrives at 09-00, in plenty of time for the 09-36 departure. At the station, the departure screen shows the 09-36 service as being full. The 09-18 train has plenty of room. Will the holder of the "only valid after 09-30" ticket be allowed on the 09-18 service under these conditions ?

The system was supplied by Petards, handily located in Gateshead. Their standard product is eyeTrain; this one may be the same or maybe customised. It has infrared sensors above each door that count every person going through - or at least try to. Obviously there is scope for error and ambiguity, especially with children and large dogs!

One thing that occurs to me is that there must be a "reset to zero" button to be pushed when the train is know to be empty (possibly by a software finger). When that happens, whatever count is present provides evidence the accumulated error. So somewhere there should be a log of those numbers - it would be interesting to know what they are!

I think it is done by measuring the total weight of each vehicle, and then assuming an average weight per passenger.
Probably assuming small healthy Japanese people and not overweight pie munching brits (pies not obtained on board of course, alternative pie vendors are available)

Edited to add, that it is done by actual counting and NOT by weight, see later posts.

Stuving is correct and Broadgage is incorrect.

Crew can do a reset to zero at any point they wish and as the train completes its journey it is usually reset to zero automatically.  What used to be an unreliable system is now much better, though isn't foolproof as it only takes a sensor to fail for the count to become inaccurate.

Yes indeed, the following departures from Paddington are currently listed as 5 vice 9/10 on JourneyCheck:

08:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 11:31
09:37 London Paddington to Paignton due 12:50
11:18 London Paddington to Cardiff Central due 13:17
13:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:35
13:32 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 15:08
15:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 18:33
16:18 London Paddington to Swansea due 19:21
17:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 18:40
17:32 London Paddington to Taunton due 20:14
17:36 London Paddington to Plymouth due 21:25
22:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 02:16

In reality, the following departures from Paddington are short formed:

09:37 London Paddington to Paignton due 12:50
17:36 London Paddington to Plymouth

So that's 2 instead of 11.

..and the 09:37 - which I plan to be on tomorrow - is showing on the app as lightly loaded despite being reduced to five coaches.

Some 45 short formed trains today...none of which are IET's.  ;)

 :D ;D

A symptom, perhaps, that we have a fair weather railway in which resources are pared down to a minimum.   If nothing goes wrong, there are enough resources to cover the advertised / contracted provision, but as soon as there's a glitch with IETs, signallers, Turbos, Train managers, booking office staff,  train drivers, or people who can fix points, things go "pear shaped" - sometimes VERY pear shaped!

In reality, short formed trains (IMHO) get relatively high publicity - some trains undoubtedly overcrowd as a result, but many don't; contraflow workings, and service tails, for example.  Cancellations / short workings far more important - looking back at yesterday, I note that only one train out of the six scheduled to serve Melksham after 4 p.m. actually did so ...

Eight shortformed trains listed on JourneyCheck out of Paddington for the remainder of the day.  In reality only one of them still is: 17:02 Paddington>Bristol TM.

Of all the trains to shortform on a Friday, this is probably the worst......

Facilities on the 19:04 London Paddington to Penzance due 00:35.

This is due to a fault on this train.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9.

I wonder if shortforming the 17:04 or 18:04 (both 10 cars today) would be even worse.  Haven't most people escaped London by 7 p.m., or do people hold back and use this train because of fare differentials?

Good job it isn’t shortformed then:  https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:W43522/2022-08-05/detailed#allox_id=0

Certainly, from the few times I've taken it, the 17 04 has been pretty quiet once the Pewsey contingent have got off.   That's the train with the most restrictions.  The 18 04 has fewer restrictions and is hence a fair bit busier but not like the late morning/middle of the day trains (again, in my limited experience).   Probably the way the stock works means the only choice for shortforming is unfortunately the 19 04.   

Which also means three others currently shown as shortformed on Journeycheck are in fact nine carriages.  13:00 and 17:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington and the 15:02 in the other direction. All formed with 800 310.

GWR Journey check still saying it's shortformed but good news if you're correct.

It still is, after the train has left Reading, where it was on the screens (and Tiger) as a 9-car. Ain't these modern computer thingies amazing?

Confirmed with a visual sighting.

The journeycheck entry was last updated at 05:20 I note.  Again, you have to question the point of it sometimes!

I go with the visual sighting.   The days of "Computer says, so must be right" are long passed - and especially so in this case where the computer feeds differ. RIRO on Journey check (Rubbish in, Rubbish out!)?

..and it is nine carriages.

As is the 13:03. Both trains, which would have been busy anyway, covering for the loss of the 12:36 to Paignton.

First time in a fair old while since I've been on a GWR IET.

Clean. Perfectly acceptable seat comfort. Quiet, comfortable ride with lovely cooling aircon. Reservations clearly marked. Well stocked trolley just passed. Clear PA announcements.

All the things to make for a relaxing, albeit short, journey from Bath to Swindon.

Great trains.

An Update on the automated on-board announcements on the Cotswold line.

Worcestershire parkway has now been added to the announcements. However a quiet male voice has been used in among the other stations announced in the usual loud female voice.
 
Yesterday I caught the early morning down Turbo service. On this the female voice announces all the stations including Worcestershire Parkway.

I can only assume you’ve mislaid your rose-tinted spectacles, Justin?  ;)

Justin and I had a bet on who would respond first to that post.... and we lost.   ;D

Morning journey across SWR & GWR with two connections went swimmingly.

GWR returning to form on my return journey. Planned connection at Westbury cancelled due to staff shortages (1F21 CDF - PMH). One hour plus delay. Next service to Salisbury very busy with aircon in one of the two units not working. Consequently other unit rammed. I'm sat on a lovely luggage rack (now - THAT is a hard uncomfortable seat, broadgage!) At least the aircon blower is directly above. Small mercies.

EDIT: And SWR doing their bit too. No aircon in either unit on 1754 from Salisbury to Exeter. Suspected that might be the case before boarding. Guard waiting on platform with crates of water. I suppose a job lot of bottled water is cheaper than actually fixing, or fitting reliable, aircon.

Dear SWR. Can we have some of those lovely air conditioned Hitachis for the WAT-EXDs please.

This is JayMac
reporting for the CoffeeShop
wilting in Wiltshire and sweating in Somerset.

European railway channel Nonstop Eurotrip has posted a review of a trip from CDF to PAD in first class on a Class 800:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_pE5sH62Vg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_pE5sH62Vg)

The general verdict at the end is 'good but not amazing'.

I noticed two parts (of the same set?) in Eastleigh works on Saturday. Does this mean something is happening?

I hope so! The modifications were seen on test in March and the "production" line was being set up at Eastleigh in around May. That suggests there should now be several treated units back in the fleet, but as I've not seen any pictures I suspect that can't be true. And I don't think they'll be running about unnoticed - the strengthening is quite chunky. It may be that there's been some tweaking of the add-ons for serial semi-industrial application, or some other delay.

Very familiar ...


Yesterday, several members attended GWR's central area timetable briefing and it was confirmed that IETs will take over 4 or 5 diagrams for Cardiff to Penzance services from December, retiring Castles.   Question raised as to where the IETs will come from, and it transpires that GWR are not at present running as many diagrams as they could be doing - there are spare IETs which could have been running the "super fasts".  It seems that the problems such as the one above are more due to the lack of 9 car units in the right places at the start of the day, and there could be enough 5 car units to run the Cardiff to Penzance service.   Question asked (not answered, I don't think) as to whether 1st class will be declassified for these journeys.

I would also need to look back at my notes from yesterday, but some main line changes which will see a return of the 2nd South Wales train in each hour on a Saturday - with Paddington to Cardiff services using electric units - class 387 rather than class 801.    As I read it, GWR has 33 x 387 units and with Crossrail taking over Heathrow and Reading services, there is some logic in this, though I wonder about the services being a bit slower (110 v 125 mph?) and wonder if 387s have things like catering capability.

Re declassification of Cardiff to Penzance IETs: Someone did answer the question, but the answer was ‘I don’t know, I’ll find out’

Now a 9-car.  Also very familiar…

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:W43450/2022-09-28/detailed#allox_id=0

I remain very doubtful as to the adequacy of the total available IET fleet to run the existing timetable reliably with full length trains, and even more doubtful about being able to operate extra services.

Despite all the previous promises we still see regular short formations.

Downgrading Cardiff services to class 387 or similar units will free up some IETs but enough ?

IETs were allegedly inter city trains, though many considered them a backward step. 387s and similar units are suburban trains and were never even claimed to be inter city, yet are becoming the norm on former inter city routes. Or is Cardiff now a suburb ?

 And what happened to the original plan that IETs could be converted to electric trains by removing all but one engine ?

Was it ever a ‘plan’ or just a statement of fact (that still stands) should an appropriate amount of the routes they serve become electrified? 

Realistically that would need to be Cardiff to Swansea and Chippenham/Bristol Parkway to Bristol Temple Meads at the very least.

What is the rationale behind this decision? Seems bonkers to me.

In June I went for a trip on one of the Castle sets and thought it was brilliant. They have been refurbished really well and it will be a retrograde step to retire (and presumably scrap) them.

Against the alternatives, Castle Class sets are expensive to run and expensive to maintain. That'll be the rationale for retiring what was always meant as a stop gap.

Not a retrograde step. Retrograde would be replacing them with something older. I love HSTs as much as the next enthusiast, but venerable doesn't necessarily equal practical or logical.

Plans for this have been in the pipeline since the report on the HST derailment at Carmont was published.

Did I notice several 9 down to 5 car units on IET's over this weekend?
Seemed to be more noticeable

I believe two castle diagrams are being replaced by IETs from the December timetable change.

That's a good idea. They will be able to run electric between Cardiff and Patchway, and hopefully into Temple Meads before they reach the end of the first two extensions to their working life.

This appeared on Twitter earlier - timeline for withdrawing the 2+4 HST sets

https://twitter.com/stpeterslayout/status/1596125590733611009?s=61&t=nVvvEwaf6JQqGCa5_84SIA

From jorneycheck
08:04 London Paddington to Penzance due 13:07
Facilities on the 08:04 London Paddington to Penzance due 13:07.
Catering is reduced in the front part of this train. Toilet facilities are not available at front. Disabled toilet facilities are reduced at front.
Additional Facilities Information
Below freezing temperatures have affected the water pipes on this train. No water is available for catering in the front part of this train, and therefore no hot drinks are available.

However, I note the 14;15 also has this note.  Would have thought the pipes would have unfrozen by midday!

I can't speak for the rest of the country but in Didcot the highest temperature it has been since Satuday is 0.3 C, with it being -10 C last night, so maybe it won't defrost today.

A traveller with LNER reports that their Leeds to London IEP service has had to halt as its 'horn is frozen'.

Mark

No hot drinks? No toilets?

They're taking the p!55.  :P ;D

Love the Triang movement!

A frozen horn is a serious risk in this sort of weather. It can even become brittle and fall off if not kept properly warm. On trains, too.

Are these trains fit for anything?

Not much. Just moving people around the country at up to 125 mph.

As long is it's not hot, cold, too wet or too dry...........or Sunday (reliably).......or Autumn.......or they're cracked.....etc....etc.

...and there's somebody to drive it.

Certainly not today judging by the map/Journey check.

It’s Sunday. Sunday’s are run on rest day working / overtime. And there’s a ban on that type of work until January 2. Then 4 more days of strike action.

If the "up to" is anything like the adverts for broadband speeds .............................

I know it makes not one jot of difference to the passenger, but just to clarify:

1)  Most, if not all, cancellations today will be due to a shortage of Train Managers, not drivers.  There is no official action taking place, or announced, within ASLEF currently.
2)  Sunday's aren't technically run on rest day working/overtime, but it's fair to say they do rely on it to a certain amount.  Those Train Managers who have committed Sundays will still be expected to turn up to work, and the normal Sunday arrangements for drivers apply.  Nobody from RMT will be volunteering for additional Sundays or overtime outside their allocated shift or any of the other more subtle methods that usually get trains covered, which is why there are numerous cancellations today.

Ah ... "up to 17 trains calling every day" at my local station...
Current sequence ... 8, 15, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 6 ...

Clarification appreciated, thank you ... I'm getting to be at the stage of being at a loss for words, though, at the frustration of what appear to passengers to be flaws in the current system such that the published timetable cannot be delivered in all but the rarest of circumstances.

How can WE - as passengers / a passenger group help all the players to make things better for customers, which I am going to define as making for a (more) reliable train service?

To be patient and weather the storm is the only option I guess?

The only good thing is that the ramping up of the industrial action from the RMT is unsustainable in anything but the short term, so either the Government/DfT or the Unions will break at some point and some sort of deal will be brokered.  The extent of the collateral damage caused in the meantime remains to be seen, but, speaking personally, it's a very difficult time to be a part of the railway industry, and worrying that so much is going wrong generally in the world at the moment.

Staff are starting to face a dilemma - the amount of earnings lost to strike action versus the likely amount of any pay rise actually obtained in the eventual settlement.

It seems that losses so far for an RMT member are approaching 2% of salary. The offer that has been made is 4%, so the question being asked is 'just how much more than 6% (4% plus the 'lost' 2%) are we likely to end up with, and is it worth continuing to lose further income?'

Pressure seemingly building on Mick. I suspect that is why he suggested needing a 'fast' settlement the other day.

Thank you, that is correct, and I am grateful. My comment should have read someone to do the non-driving part of the operation.

I’m not sure this has been mentioned on this thread - it is getting quite a few pages long now - but I would like to highlight the ride quality (actually the lack there of) of the IET.

This Saturday was an opportunity to go roaming across the Southern/Western region - where a total of 6 different types of stock was sampled. And the ride quality difference was marked.

By far the best was the Class 450 EMU - my first experience of these. The quality of ride across some lumpy and bumpy southern rails was remarkable - with more than one occurrence of such a smooth departure I was caught out from registering it taking place.

I was also taken aback of how big the inside of these units felt. A completely different feel from the IEP and its slight claustrophobic ambience with its inwards slanting sides (ala Class 222). I wished I had a tape measure to do a more scientific comparison!

Back to my point - with two new relatively new class types why is there such a difference in ‘standards’ - is it’s down solely to manufacturers doctrine / preference.

I know I might be accused of comparing apples with pears - but London to Southampton is not vastly different from London to Bristol with similar stopping patterns at major centres. The only plus point for the IET I could note was that it had, it seemed, better acceleration than its EMU brethren.

There’s little point making comparisons on ride quality unless it’s on the same track, the same relative position within the carriage, and at the same speed.

And the same seats ;) the lack of padding in places in the Fainsa seats on a Class 8xx probably exacerbates or magnifies any bumps. I now travel with a cushion.

Just to add this train crew notice to further explain my previous post, and perhaps it might explain your poor ride quality experience?  Even if you weren’t on this particular bit of track it shows how it might be the track and not the train that’s responsible.

Very interesting post on journeycheck today (8th February)
https://www.journeycheck.com/greatwesternrailway/
08:50 Penzance to Cardiff Central due 14:20
Facilities on the 08:50 Penzance to Cardiff Central due 14:20.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 9 coaches instead of 5.

Bonus upgrade!
Usually second class only,  and nine coaches including first.

Welcome upgrade to that service.
Only applies to perhaps one service today, but...

Could happen more often as the Castle sets are withdrawn.

Looks like it's only a 5-car (800007) and is actually booked for an IET all week and formed off the 06:39 from PLY.  

It then goes on to work the 15:00 CDF-TAU, 17:11 TAU-CDF, 20:00 CDF-TAU and 22:44 TAU-BRI.

Seem to be a few more toilet issues over the last few days.
Seemingly not being fixed overnight, and now a few other units having the same problem.
(Noted from journeycheck)

I’m not sure there are more issues, just that they are now being listed on journeycheck when a single toilet is out of use?

We seem to go through these little fads of reporting new things on journeycheck with little consistency over time, so perhaps such detail won’t last long.

I’m not sure such detail is especially helpful anyway.  A reduction of one toilet (or even two) on an IET isn’t likely to cause many issues.  More than that and yes it is useful information, or if it’s one of the Universal Access Toilets.  Also on shorter non IET stock where there are only one or two toilets fitted.  But dozens of listings for a single toilet out on a 9-car set?  Unnecessary IMHO.

Yesterday I had an unexpected journey on a Castle class; Berry Pomeroy Castle, I think it was. This was from Gloucester to Bristol Temple Meads on the service that usually comes from Worcester, but yesterday was starting from Gloucester due to engineering works, and is usually some sort of 3-car DMU. Whatever you think of IET seats, the ride quality compared to a Castle does show the benefit of 45 or so years' development of suspension. And whether or not the thrum of the underfloor engines disturbs you when they're running, the carriages themselves are so much quieter than the Castles, which make an assortment of squeaks, bumps and rattles. However, the Castle class guard's van cycle space beats anything on an IET hands down!

With the greatest of respect you clearly have not been around sharp/sharpish curves such as just to the west of Dawlish Warren and between Dainton and Totnes  where these IETs bogies negotiate in a series of straight jerks compared  to the seamless flow experienced on HSTs.
Also depending where you are ( uncomfortably ) seated in an IET the noise and rattles from bogies can at times be alarming.

I most certainly have been along that section of track in an IET and doubtless shall again as my son lives in Falmouth!

A good place to live.

I was very surprised of the ride on a non stop run from Bristol to Reading on Easter Saturday. When we got under the wires at Parkway and speeded up the whole train rattled and rolled in a way that I found unbelievable for a so called modern train. Really pleased to get off.

There appear to be some IET problems today with journey check showing a number of short forms (several diagrams), plus a failure at Reading.

First 9 car failure of today?
1A71 05:55 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:01
05:55 Plymouth to London Paddington due 09:01 was terminated at Exeter St Davids.
It will no longer call at Taunton, Newbury, Reading and London Paddington.
This is due to a fault on this train.
Now running as 5A71 to Stoke Gifford

My query is that the guessing drivers were changed as the originating Plymouth driver was route signed to ? Taunton or Reading, but would they know the route to Stoke Gifford, or a change of driver at Exeter to someone signed for Stoke who just happened to be 'spare' at Exeter?
Would the train manager(s) and catering staff be turfed out at Exeter to become 'spare'?

Many different beers and wines have been drunk in Falmouth, as indeed was I at some point a few decades ago.

Lived there for many years, met and married my Wife, also from Falmouth, in Falmouth!
Neither of us are Cornish, but Cornish by association and living in Cornwall for many many years (but that's a totally different topic).

I've certainly noticed the jerks on an IET on the curve just west of Dawlish Warren

Not a problem unique to IETs. You'll find jerks on all sorts of trains. After football and rugby matches, major horse racing meetings, on Friday and Saturday nights heading away from large towns and cities, returning from the seaside of a weekend...
;) :P ;D

Seems to be several short forms 5 (vice 9 or 10) already this morning.

Pinched for extra services for the end of Glastonbury?

Most likely yes. I suspect the same reason for a number of unavailable IETs over the last few days as well, GWR’s IET fleet fully stretched to meet the demands of Glastonbury.

The official reason given is "This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time" - that also for a number of cancellations on Cardiff - Taunton - Penzance. 

I am highly suspicious of the reason given - I agree with other members here that it's probably due to the demands of Glastonbury.   What a sad world where someone feels it's necessary to tell us porkies, or that we suspect we're being fed porkies.  Or perhaps there ARE one or two more than "usual" needed repairs ... on top of half a dozen needed for Glastospecials.

On an IET up to London for the first time in a while. Hitachi seem to be no longer cleaning the exterior for some reason, and also, this one's suspension is... firm.

On the bright side, while we were 10 minutes down at Didcot after following a freight that was a bit late into its loop, the Oxford connection was held for a minute to spare the transfer people the hour's wait.

*edit* If I believe my phone, interior sound levels are 80dB too, which isn't particularly quiet. On the good side, driver is giving it beans, though not able to make up the time at this point.

(I don't quite believe my phone, as how does the Physics Toolbox app calibrate itself...)

Mark

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:P75235/2023-07-24/detailed

I doubt it was held for connections, but because the previous departure to Oxford left a few minutes late.  Puzzled as to why there would be an hours wait had it not connected though?

I was waiting at Exeter St David's yesterday (24/06) morning when I heard a member of the platform staff making an announcement apologising to passengers because their service to London Paddington had no reservations because their service was a 9-car instead of the usual 5-car set!

That must be a first!

Happened to me a couple of times when it was 10 rather than 9............or possibly the other way around!

Keep an eye on journeycheck amendments & you'll see it reasonably often (almost daily somewhere)

Not all short formed services are listed on Journeycheck. I had the misfortune to be on one earlier that was not listed* and also got caught in the delays between London and Reading. Another Delay Repay claim going in.

*This diagram, usually a nine car, had been shorted formed right from the off with the first departure listed as such, subsequent services were not. This was not related to signalling issues between Paddington and Reading.

05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:55
Facilities on the 05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:55.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10. There are no reservations on this service

Was short formed yesterday as well.

Yes, apologies, I've slandered the railway - being completely conditioned to expect a 50+ minute wait at Didcot for connections to Oxford from the West, the service is now more frequent and there's another at 13:38. The platform staff too were helpfully, er, encouraging people to move at speed between the platforms for the connection.

Mark

10:20 Penzance to London Paddington due 15:27
10:20 Penzance to London Paddington due 15:27 will no longer call at Tiverton Parkway and Taunton.
This is due to a fault on this train.

1A84 - non stop Exeter to Reading.
Guessing door problems at the intermediate station calls.
Surely if there is a door problem, it will be present at all the station stops?

Perhaps a fault with selective door opening ? In which case the train could stop normally at major stations with long platforms, but not at shorter platforms.
Or possibly low power, that would result in loss of time after a station stop.

Indeed. Low power. A problem that a number of the fleet are suffering.

Realistically you have to wonder how long the IETs can continue operating like this.

And as with cracks and other faults, are hitachi paying any compensation for the daily lack of units ? And for the often poor performance of those that do enter service.

I suspect that hitachi have found some wiggle room that avoids such payments. They probably have better lawyers than do GWR, HMG, Etc.

And btw does anyone know what caused the low power problem ?

There is a supply contract with Hitachi, and they get penalised iif the required stock units don't get delivered as contract, yes

Sort of.  I believe the contracts between the 800 and 802 are different, the 800 contract being more stringent.

Long term, the running costs COULD be huge.  The engines can’t cope with what’s being asked of them to the point that there’s a significant backlog with the supplier for repairs.  Around a third of the fleet is currently running around with at least one engine isolated. 

I’m willing to bet the majority of sets with engines out are the 802s operating to/from the Southwest which have to work the hardest travelling the most distance ‘off the wires’. Those trains that are running with at least one engine down will put more strain on the engines that are working.

How sad a rolling program of electrification making it’s away towards the Southwest was never implemented. It’s going to cost more in the long run by not continuing to electrify.

Actually, the last list I saw was probably an equal split.  800’s are quite often finding themselves down in the South West though.

They either need to ditch the IET, relocate to operators where they’ll spend the majority of the time under the wires and bring a new fleet into to GWR.  Failing that, extend electrification.  Reliability isn’t going to improve with age.

Agree that it is time to give up on the wretched units, at least for long distance express services.
Relocate them to other operators, if anyone wants them, or redeploy them within GWR to outer suburban, regional, or other secondary routes.
Use on slower services should increase reliability as the engines are less stressed.

Build new intercity trains for long distance services.
Bi mode locomotive or power car at each end, no underfloor engines.
Fixed formation 9 or 10 car, or the same total length as a 5+5 IET.
Padded seats. Space for surfboards and other holiday luggage
A proper full sized buffet car, not a micro buffet or parked trolley.
A kitchen to permit of full meal service on selected trains.
design speed of 125 mph on OHLE and 100 MPH on diesel. The reduced speed on diesel would reduce the cost, size and weight of the engines, with a minimal effect on performance.

Train formation, from London end.
Power car, staff access only, storage of catering supplies and emergency equipment.
A first class and kitchen car. About 25 first class seats.
B First class with about 50 seats and two toilets.
C first class with about  44 seats, one wheelchair space and two toilets, one accessible.

D standard class, about 80 seats, two toilets.
E standard class, same as D.
F standard class, about 70 seats, two wheelchair spaces, two toilets one wheelchair accessible. Train mangers office.
G Buffet car, central buffet servery, with longitudinal seating each end of the vehicle. about 40 seats.
H standard class, about 80 seats, two toilets.
I standard class about 80 seats and two toilets.
J same as I.
Power car, staff access only. light express freight, heavy luggage, emergency equipment.

Total 2 and a half first class coaches with about 120 seats.
Total 7 standard class coaches with about 510 seats.
I have assumed relatively long vehicles as used for IETs. With more conventional coaches capacity per vehicle would be reduced, but a total of 11 coaches should be possible without the total length being excessive.

Yes, I'm sure that's going to happen, the Unicorn I was just speaking to agrees as well.

ooooooooooooooz gonna pay for it!
The Treasury are already cutting back.  Can't see them seeing sense just before an election

I do recall that previous generations of trains have had issues in their early years.  I took a ride on an IET yesterday from Bristol Temple Meads to Chippenham.   Perfectly reasonable for my journey; fast enough and on time (thank goodness - 5 minute connection at Chippenham onto a sparse train to Melksham)

Mind you - I hardly ever use any "long distance expresses" on GWR - living in the middle of their patch, all my journeys are more regional that long distance, so perhaps I'm biased by personal use.

5 car, absolutely perfect for Portsmouth - Cardiff..............even with 1 or 2 engines down.

I'm really not sure why I'm bothering, but let's put aside the fact that there's no chance of it happening.

You're proposing a train that has eleven vehicles (nine carriages and two power cars), adds a buffet, removes a kitchen (compared with a 10-car IET formation), adds a TM's office, increases the number of toilets by six from 10 to 16, increases first class seating by 50, reduces standard class by 70 seats (so 20 less seats overall)...and still manages to fit within the overall length of an existing 10-car IET?  Oh, and presumably there's more seats at tables and no leg room compromises?

Quite apart from the folly of suggesting a 12% reduction in standard class seating at a time where some leisure trains are already packed to the rafters, I'd love to see a crayonista make that work as an actual working design!

No problem,  GWR are experts at making that happen. GWR promised "more seats" for Portsmouth - Cardiff, they did manage that.............with 5 abreast seating rolling stock instead of 4 abreast !!!!!  The fact that most of these "extra" seats are unusable by normal sized human beings - we'll ignore that.  Average journey time London to Swansea is about 30 mins less than Portsmouth to Cardiff..............could almost manage 6 abreast seating for that short trip  :D

I would say that GWR are trying to emulate Ryanair - but they are actually way ahead already. Michael O'Leary has merely floated the idea of having standing passengers on his Boeings - GWR have already achieved that on most of their trains already.

You are correct in what you say….. except a lot of the decisions aren’t GWR’s. They are being micromanaged by the DfT and have been for many years.  The DfT calls the shots, they are the ones dictating what happens.

The DfT says the Castle sets have to go. No replacement sorted, stretch the fleet as thin as it’ll go and make it work. This will become more and more apparent.

A shame you were also one of our regular posters who were unable/unwilling to directly question the GWR MD with your concerns last week.

To be fair, II, a-driver has indicated in his post just before yours what the answer would be - it's what DfT tells us to do.

Perhaps the next time Mark Harper shows up for a photo opp at a station opening in our area he could be invited to participate in a session with our forum like "our" Mark H to answer these questions?

Not sure it is DfT  I suspect the decision is made in the Treasury who of course know so much about everything we wonder why any other government department exists.

Just a thought.....perhaps it should be Hopwood challenging Harper.

I would suspect that questions have been asked from GWR to the DfT.

Should we invite Mark Harper to a "Meet the Secretary of State" session?

Go on, he can only say no. I'd be interested in reading anything more he had to say.

To be fair, as a politician, he’d be incapable of providing a simple yes or no answer!!

Yup, my point exactly!

Wondering if LNER are also experiencing this, with theirs.

Mark

Their diesel mileage percentage must be quite a bit lower. 

You don’t really notice an engine out on a 9 or 10-car service anyway though.  You do notice if two or more are our, but that’s fairly rare IME.

LNER have two sets with an engine isolated, but as IndustryInsider said, they spend most of the time under the wires.

You notice 1 engine out on the steeper gradients on the network and where linespeeds are 100/110mph.

Having checked around with the moderator / admin team (onto whom the organising would fall), we have gone ahead and sent an invite.  It was actually quite a useful exercise in defining the Coffee Shop to an expert newcomer.

This service is making extra stops and picking up passengers (somehow I don’t think it will) from the cancelled 08:35 Plymouth-Paddington. What a time for this to be a 5 vice 10 if JC is correct  ::)

From RTT it looks like it was terminated 48 late at RDG:

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:P75267/2023-08-04/detailed#allox_id=0 (https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:P75267/2023-08-04/detailed#allox_id=0)

Yes it did terminate at Reading and formed the 13.03 Paddington to Plymouth which started at Reading leaving 23 minutes late. Probably left late due to having to ram everyone onto a five coach IET along with all their luggage  ::)

Problems with IETs continue, with short formations being routine.
I have previously felt that this is due to defective design or manufacture.

However else where on these forums, at least one well informed member has stated that they are meeting the required levels of availability.

See here for example


   
"Re: Shortage of train crews on Great Western Railway since September 2017 - ongoing discussion
« Reply #2048 on: Yesterday at 03:57:43 pm »
Reply with quoteQuote
Quote from: broadgage on August 12, 2023, 02:34:12 pm

So nothing much can be done ? And we are simply stuck with new shorter trains for about another 20 years.
That will help encourage flying and driving, and sod the climate emergency.

This is your question to which I replied that the taxpayer would pay (for longer trains it seems your wish was for). Hitachi completed the contract as stated - otherwise they *would* be rectifying."


So what went wrong ?
Years ago I forecast that that the new trains would be shorter, and they are often shorter.
Was the Hitachi contract so badly drafted that the present shambles counts as meeting the requirements of the contract ?
Or was the intention that the new trains would be shorter.

The present situation is a powerful deterrent to use of GWR services. Reserving a seat does not much help as reservations are voided on half length trains.

BTW, my wish for "longer trains" was for trains of the full planned length, 9 car or 5+5 car. Not for longer than that. At present a great deal of money has been spent to achieve shorter trains.

IET caught with its pants up today, 14th August 2023.

1C78 1103 PAD-PLY is at a stand just outside Newbury after its pantograph failed to drop at the end of the OLE section and subsequently hit a bridge and was ripped off.

I can feel a poll coming on ... to avoid such incidents (I recall one at Blackfriars) should we:
1. Electrify complete routes
2. Stop all trains to change from electric to off-wire diesel traction
3. Convert all overhead equipment to 3rd rail which would not have this problem
4. Revert to steam haulage as standard.
Note to anyone who wonders about me - such a poll would go in "The Lighter Side" but I actually fancy the idea of electrifying complete routes.

Journalist Jacquelin Magnay has been tweeting from the stricken train:

https://twitter.com/jacquelinmagnay (https://twitter.com/jacquelinmagnay)

As well as posting a photo of overcrowded conditions on board she said "Our stranded #GWR train expected in Westbury in an hour, or so, where we can get off, many miles from where anyone wants to be. Something on top of our train still hitting the bridges. Oh joys"

That's quite the observation...

Mark

 … and 5C78 (formerly known as 1C78) is still at Westbury with a RTT path at 1520 to Stoke Gifford.  Hope they clear the debris off the roof before it gets to Bristol Parkway. 

5. Build some proper bi-mode intercity trains that work reliably on diesel or electric power. Word the contract carefully in order that what looks like abject failure cant be considered as a great success by the supplier.

The good people of Westbury will be very sad to read that view of their town ...

Probably coz they are all going to stations west of Exeter....

800316 is now (at 1605) showing as 5C78 FAIL at Westbury P1.  Perhaps it is quite likes Westbury and doesn’t want to leave even if it is cluttering up the station.  It is/was called “#Lionesses” – is this a bad omen?

What remains of the pant probably neds tying/strapping down before being allowed to move further

1C78 currently at Exeter St Davids (16:42). Presumably the set was switched at Westbury, but how was this achieved?

It was a 10-car unit, so the rear one (which is the one that had the pan damaged) would have been detached at Westbury.

[EDIT] Please disregard this post.

Looks like it was replaced with 800312 on 5Z78 from Swindon.
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:86585/2023-08-14/detailed#allox_id=0

Ugh, so the 1100 pax are now in those 5cars!

1C78 definitely 9 cars passing Dawlish.

Yes, please disregard my previous post - I put two and two together and got five, rather than nine! :-)

We had a running commentary from a concerned parent waiting at Exeter St David's for their charges who were on 1C78.

Apparently, they were told to decamp at Westbury and board 1C85 (1436 PAD-PGN) which was formed of 5-car 802016, which fairly obviously could not cope with the additional load. After a further delay, an empty 9-car turned up to continue 1C78 onto Plymouth**.

Edit....
** It appears that 1B16 (1318 PAD-CDF), formed of 9-car 800312, was caped at Swindon 'due to an issue with the train crew' and the unit sent to Westbury as 5C78 to replace the stricken 800316 (which was eventually sent to Stoke Gifford)

Seeming lots of 10 and 9 cars down to 5 cars today.  I wonder what the maths is - are more 9 cars out of service than 5 cars, or is it just an arithmetic quirk?  Are there trains that are running as 9 cars when they would normally be 5, but not being reported? The fleet looks like:

36 - 5 car 800/0 800-001 to 800-036
22 - 5 car 802/0 802-001 to 802-022

21 - 9 car 800/3 800-301 to 800-321
14 - 9 car 802/1 802-101 to 802-114

Several reduced formations to/from Cornwall today.
Also many stopping/starting short in Devon and Cornwall.

More than 20 Cl80x out of action yesterday due to repairs with 9 Castles working instead of the planned 7.
Source Richard Clinnick on Twitter/X
https://x.com/clinnick1/status/1693899436076794039?s=61&t=VlafMC5gF9tidw36b1Y8JQ

There’s certainly a bit of a crisis of availability at the moment.  No slack in the system (as Mark Hopwood confessed in the ‘Meet The Manager’) and further overall stock reductions to come shortly from the mandate of the DfT does not bode at all well longer term, even when IET availability improves.

Anyone know where things are with regard to the number of units still waiting for remedial work following the cracks issue?

I do not believe that there is much WE can do. The IETs are unreliable, and seem unlikely to improve much for some years at least. I appreciate that some actually like them and blame the endless short formations on things other than the trains, but from the point of view of the average passenger, new trains=shorter trains.
Passenger comfort and facilities are a bit subjective, but are generally accepted to be inferior to the previous trains.
As a passenger group, we can "keep up the pressure" on GWR, but I doubt that much will be achieved.

The present industrial disputes will eventually end, but I do not believe that we, as a passenger group can do much to accelerate the process.

And after the strikes end, we will face the normal staff shortages. GWR, and before them FGW have proved incapable of or unwilling to recruit enough staff to run reliably run a full service. This has been the case for YEARS and any near term improvement seems most unlikely.

I'm not sure that the average passenger gives a toss about train length. It's much for about frequency, reliability,  reasonable journey time, and some comfort, including enough capacity to be comfortable.

I grumbled on Saturday about a 2 car being sent out on our 09:10 - first southbound train of the day. The grumble was not because of the length as such - it was because families could not sit together, children were on knees and some were standing rather together rather than jamming themselves into the middle seats of separate 3s.  Give us an hourly 2 car each way to spread the load and we'll be happy for a short while (except it will be so popular that will become overcrowded!


We tend to decry the negative changes for years but celebrate the positive ones for just days, though.  And there are times that "keeping up the pressure" appear to achieve nothing but for all we know we may have prevented a negative change.


Agreed; I have been scratching my head look at how we can help and can't come up with much.  Even strongly showing we want the issues solved can be counterproductive because the sides (yes, I have said "sides") see that as support for the railways and they see themselves as the railway angels or saviours.


Agreed;  I think it is industry wide though!


[/quote]

Two of the last IETs I've taken have been worryingly juddery - sufficiently so that in both cases I've flagged it to the train manager.

This morning I was on the 10.53 out of Paddington (https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:P75697/2023-09-29/detailed) in Coach D, and there were continuous judders all through the carriage. I first noticed it around the Heathrow junction, but it continued pretty much all the way through to Oxford, and then became more intense between Oxford and Hanborough again.

Not sure if these are just the expected autumn wheel flats (I'm not any sort of engineer let alone a train engineer!) but I don't recall noticing anything this bad on any other train.

Oh dear, that would never have been  allowed in the olden days when that  train was the Golden Hind!

I don’t think the 10:53 from Paddington to Worcester has ever been called ‘The Golden Hind’.  ;)

AFAIK, the Golden Hind has always been an early evening departure from Paddington to Penzance, the last through train to Penzance that runs every weekday, and an early morning departure from Penzance to London.
Timings have varied a bit over the years, but generally the first direct up train and last direct down train that runs every weekday, excluding the sleeper.

Introduced in 1964 between Plymouth and Paddington, after Drake’s ship that left from Plymouth. Later extended to Penzance

Or if it was running late, the Golden Behind.

I had a very rough ride on a Paddington to Worcester IET just under a month ago.  I didn't think it was wheelflats, but something weird with the leading bogie, which definitely was hunting.  Not a nice experience, with fingers crossed that the wheel flanges managed to stay on the right fact of the rail

+1. That feeling with certain IET trains that you're not riding *in* something, more like riding *on* it.

Mark

Quite possibly the same stock.

Hmmm ... invite sent.   Didn't say "no" - didn't even acknowledge ...

I have a better idea ...

What, a general election?

Engine reliability and general fleet availability has now improved significantly.  Some days have seen more units available than needed...though not always in the right places to avoid the odd short form.

Unfortunately 06:05 Penzance to London Paddington due 11:29
06:05 Penzance to London Paddington due 11:29 has been cancelled.
This is due to a fault on this train.

At least three IET sets succumbed to the Dawlish/Teignmouth waves thanks to Storm Babet.

A bit like the "wrong sort of snow" then  ?  ;)

Indeed as reported on Dawlish Today

https://www.dawlish-today.co.uk/news/storm-babet-causes-chaos-on-the-dawlish-to-teignmouth-railway-line-644760

2am ouch!

Did they really spell 'lose' and 'losing' with two 'o's? ??? :o

The IET which failed at Teignmouth this morning seems to have been moved to Newton Abbot platform 1 and is currently sitting there with a headcode 5H17. Is this saying what I think it means?!

No that’s a different IET.

Full story here  http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=28017.0 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=28017.0)

No, that’s the IET that failed at Teignmouth Tuesday evening on 1C92

Lower availability today in Cornwall
05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:55
Facilities on the 05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:55.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10. There are no reservations on this service. (No added coaches at Plymouth).
Also
07:12 Plymouth to Penzance due 09:19
07:12 Plymouth to Penzance due 09:19 will be reinstated.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 2 coaches instead of 9. First class not available. There are no reservations on this service.
This turns into
10:20 Penzance to London Paddington due 15:27
Facilities on the 10:20 Penzance to London Paddington due 15:27.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 2 coaches instead of 9 to Plymouth. First class not available to Plymouth. There are no reservations on this service to Plymouth.

Of course, residents in Melksham would be delighted to have a regular 2 car train daily with a half hour service!
So Cornwall shouldn't complain.

I am told by a couple of passengers that the 10:20 was in fact formed of a 5 car IET.   Looks like there was a set swap at Penzance with an incoming service from Bristol Temple Meads.   The 5 car ran all the way to London with no change of train or attachment at Plymouth.   

As reported on other occasions this wasn't updated on Journeycheck.

The 1635 Paddington to Plymouth was only five vice ten, only went as far as Exeter, was absolutely rammed leaving Paddington and was not listed on Journeycheck as being shorformed. I know II has mentioned before you can’t rely on JC to give the complete picture.

I had elderly relatives on this train. Fortunately they just managed to get a seat, though not together and certainly not the ones that I had been booked for them.

The reason given was the usual ‘more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.’

Didn't the MD of GWR advise the forum "Meet the Manager" that they were in the process of arranging with Hitachi better availability of IET's!

I'm not sure if it was at our "Meet the Manager" but I have heard that said.  But then more are needed now that the HSTs have been reduced to just three daily diagrams.

Apologies, yes. Or no. It wasn't here, but on someone's vlog - Mark , and two other gents talking about trains.

Westbury to Plymouth in a Turbo??? Ouch.


17:36 London Paddington to Plymouth due 21:25
17:36 London Paddington to Plymouth due 21:25 will be reinstated.

It will be started from Westbury.
It will no longer call at London Paddington, Reading, Newbury and Pewsey.

This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 3 coaches instead of 9.

 First class not available. Catering is not available. There are no reservations on this service. Toilet facilities are reduced. Disabled toilet facilities are reduced.

Not ideal no. But fair play to GWR for able to provide something for travellers from Westbury onwards.

Being a Turbo, there will of course be first class accommodation; just declassified.

And Turbos routinely cover much longer trips such as Cardiff<>Portsmouth of course.

Of course. One can only hope that said travellers were suitably grateful.

Was it even three coaches or was it swapped for two on the way?  I am told it was 150 248 that arrived at Plymouth.

Answering my own question.  Looking at Realtime Trains it was 166 207 as far as Exeter St Davids and then 150 248 forward from there.   Thinking about it, are turbos cleared on the main line past Newton Abbot?

Yes (http://totnestrains.weebly.com/class-166.html)

Another poor customer experience for those aboard the 1635 Paddington to Plymouth 5 vice 10 and absolutely rammed according to my wife who’s on the train. First declassified. Not listed on JC as being short formed.

Stickers have finally started appearing on the trolley/urn store in the middle of the IETs.  Passengers have been confusing them for toilets since they were introduced!

I expect you will be told to be grateful they managed to find 5!

Could well be linked to the Hitachi maintenance staff industrial action which started yesterday and runs until Friday.

Journey check has now been updated to include the 1635:

I can assure the person writing this that the train was full and standing when it left Paddington.

Or that it even ran at all. Next Sunday it won’t be.

That dispute is only in Hitachi LNER depots, not GWR.

The short forms are all down to the withdrawal of the Castle sets & IETs being transferred westwards to cover.

Also covering the shortage of other DMUs. Last Wednesday one of the Bristol-Worcester workings was being covered by a 5 car IET.

yes, indeed.

There are 17 class 153 in store. One wonders if too early - I know the need for disabled loos these days but really wonder if 2 x 158 trains could run as 1 x 158 + 2 x 153.  Of course, whilst one wonders, one expects there's a very good reason why castles and 153s (and the 6 stored 156s) could be be used.

Not according to the official press release from UNITE:

https://www.unitetheunion.org/news-events/news/2024/january/national-strike-by-hitachi-rail-workers-over-pay

According to this, Unite accepted the pay offer:-

https://www.cityam.com/400-rmt-workers-at-hitachi-to-strike-on-saturday-until-1-february/

A Hitachi Rail spokesperson said: “We are disappointed at RMT’s decision to carry out industrial action.

“We believe the combination of last year’s pay increase, and this year’s pay proposal, is fair and highly competitive in the current economic environment. As demonstrated by Unite members accepting the same offer this week and ending their planned industrial action.

How many crew can you get in a crew storage area ? what type of crew are stored there? how long can they be stored for? and has this been agreed with the Unions?:)

Two full sized crew, or three small ones.
Catering crew, mainly, possibly hitachi fitters
Two hours at a time, without being let out for exercise.
Strike bruvvers !

Thanks for that.  Might explain the confusion.

Industry expert Gareth Dennis has posted on X some quite alarming photos of corrosion on LNER Azumas:

https://twitter.com/GarethDennis/status/1753413827067097297 (https://twitter.com/GarethDennis/status/1753413827067097297)

There's a Twitter thread running on the subject of visible corrosion involving LNER's IEPs, which put me in mind of a photo from December (hopefully visible below) showing either a failure in the surface coating or corrosion around a GWR IEP window. It's reasonable to wonder if these trains are going to have 'A problem'.

Regarding the LNER twitter thread, someone's remarked that water ingress at the windows is causing issues as it's able to travel to where it can cause galvanic corrosion. LNER's trains run in a somewhat salt-rich environment, and GWR's even more so, and this cannot help either.

Mark

(https://i.postimg.cc/rspWjTf5/gwr-iet-bodyshell-corrosion-1000.jpg)

Aluminium is very vulnerable to corrosion especially if in contact with steel.
Did someone use steel fixings at the factory?, or subsequently during maintenance, either is a rather basic error.

Even different grades of aluminium alloy are liable to corrosion if used in contact with each other.

Electrical leakage currents through aluminium  structures can also accelerate corrosion. DC is worst.

It will be that salt ridden sea air on the Northumberland coast.....  ;D

Ah, but don't forget, both Hitachi and GWR have assured us that their IETs are 'Dawlish proof'  ;)

And that is just the parts you can see!!

Whatever happens it’s down to Hitachi to sort out as part of the maintenance contract. 

Just like they are quietly doing with the cracks issue that people were getting excited about.

But only if not allowed to run in the worst conditions, an IET confined to the depot should survive Dawlish just fine.

Sadly as with so many things these day, IET built to a price ,not to a standard.

We need something more robust, successful and enduring - like the APT perhaps?

I thought that the price was relatively high, one criticism of the project was the substantial cost of the trains. IET=Incredibly Expensive Trains ! According to some critics.

In the early days of the project, many promises were made about the quality and reliability of these new trains.

In the early days of the project, many promises were made about the quality and reliability of these new ..............roads/hospitals/libraries/sports centres/airports/aircraft carriers/armoured cars/mail deliveries/bank availabilities/flood prevention schemes/electric cars/supermarket cashiers/Boeing 737s/etc/etc................

Suggest merging this thread with the main "problems with IETs" thread.

Hi all,

I heard a rumour recently that suggested GWR are planning to withdraw IET sets permanently due to rusting/corroding bolts. Does anybody have more information on this? Or is it untrue

.............rumour didn't come from a certain Port quaffing member of this esteemed forum by any chance?  :)

No it didn't thankfully

There’s loads of rumours surrounding IETs!

Most, if not all, concern their withdrawal.  We can only hope one, just one, turns out to be true.   ;D

Build some more HSTs !
Not of course an exact copy of a near 50 year old design, but something similar in design.
A BIMODE power car or locomotive at each end, no more underfloor bus gin palace engines.
Total train length similar to a 5+5 car IET.
Buffet car, padded seats, tables, luggage space etc.

I had a vague, yet somehow certain feeling that one would come along!  ;)

And what exactly is wrong with calling for proper trains to replace IETs ? With the features listed above, and also fixed formation. No flexible train length as flexible means shorter.
Before the wretched things were even introduced it was clear that they represented a backward step in comfort and facilities They have now been in service for some years and poor build quality and unreliability are major problems.

Where are the replacement 93 trainsets coming from?

(other than the Strategic Reserve in Box Tunnel, obviously)

Hopefully not every unit will need immediate withdrawal, some might be be allowed to run for months yet.
Some spare stock s available, the ex-TPE stock has already been suggested, and there are still some surviving HSTs stored. mainline passed stock from heritage lines is another possibility. Not adequate but a lot better than nothing.
Building loco hauled coaches  is well understood and relatively quick.
The special bi-mode locomotives/power cars would take longer, but in the short term existing diesel locos would be better than nothing.

Sounds like a great idea to me.  Perhaps it will allow GWR to operate that service to Fantasy Island at long last so we can come visit you.

I think I have now realised why Network Rail have not remedied the persistent issues with flooding in various parts of the network. I contend that they are covert water troughs designed to support the Strategic Reserve.

Surely Hitachi are on the hook for these trains and a failure to provide sufficient sets a day costs them a few quid. I know they’re not responsible for the ‘lovely’ carriage interiors but you would think they’d make sure the exteriors were fine and mechanically sound.

Then again this is just a rumour isn’t it.

They are never going to get rid of the 800s. With all the variants there are 262 sets from the 395 Javelin to Aurora 810s

Indeed.  Perhaps GWR 158 can tell us from where he heard the rumour?

I've had a look at RTT for my local station (Tiverton Parkway) and only four of the GWR trains stopping or passing through today are not 80x types. 3 are 158s doing positional stuff I suppose. The other outlier is the only loco hauled service of the day, the sleeper, which was part-cancelled and began at Reading instead of Paddington. That would be a lot to replace. Given that they are largely running to time, I very much doubt that will happen.

I certainly can, I heard it from a friend. I highly doubted this would be true anyway, I just wanted further information to see whether anyone has heard anything similar. 

All i wanted was further information, there is no need to be rude.

I was replying to Broadgage who had made the previous post, and, unfortunately, had rather hijacked your original question with his own unique brand of propaganda.  ;)

Thank you for the explanation  :) Yes I agree with you on Broadgauge's piece of false propaganda. 

Oh now, now folks  ;D

I do know of some rolling stock plans - but in them the IETs are very much here to stay.  And there's an update briefing later this week that I'll be attending and I will report back if there's different news.

Thanks for the information, it will be interesting to hear of any plans  ;D

I simply suggested possible sources of alternative rolling stock IF significant numbers of IETs are withdrawn. I see no propaganda in such a post.

At least you refrained from suggesting steam engine haulage on this particular occasion I suppose.

08:03 London Paddington to Penzance due 13:07
08:03 London Paddington to Penzance due 13:07 will call additionally at Castle Cary.
This is due to a fault on this train.

Just wondering why a problem will give an additional station stop?
I've seen it on other trips since IET's started.

I would say likely to do with the 07:03 being cancelled:

The Paignton service has been reinstated starting from Taunton, using a 3 car unit, according to Journey Check.
Running as 3C70 ecs from Bristol according to Traksy

I've noticed 'recently/a while ago' that there were a few 5 car units doing the rounds(more trains than usual, etc).
However, it is now more common to see 5 cars from Penzance to Paddington with no additional cars at Plymouth.
It is easy to say West Country services must be 9 or 10 cars at all times, but that means perhaps Bristol/Wales/Hereford lose out.
Whilst Hitachi might well be working quietly behind the scenes, I'm surprised that the 5 car issues have not been sorted at all.

Debate cars vs coaches! (I seem to remember we did have that debate a while ago).
The IET's are 5 car/coaches units, or a 9 car/coach formation anyway.

https://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=27903 (https://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=27903) - and we included "carriages" but not "vehicles".

Richard Clinnick (editor, Modern Railways) tweeted a fleet update on GWRs IETs with the cracking problem still ongoing....


So many years yet.....

Another update from Richard Clinnick. This has been going on so long that he's now on his 3rd job since the start, and is now editor, Modern Railways... ;D

So far treated - 7 5car 800/0s, 3 9car 800/3s, 12 5car 802/0s and 6 802/1s
800013 & 802017 currently at Eastleigh

In total, there are 93 IETs, 57 owned by Agility. Of those, 28 5car 800/0s and 18 9car 800/3s still need to be treated That  leaves 36 IETs owned by Eversholt of which 9 5car 802/0s and 7 9car 802/1s have yet to be treated

[if these figures don't add up, they're Richard's not mine!]

Eh?

12:15 Penzance to London Paddington due 17:31
12:15 Penzance to London Paddington due 17:31 has been cancelled.
This is due to a fault on this train.
Additional Information
Customers making journeys within Devon and Somerset can travel with Cross Country's Edinburgh service as far as Taunton, which departs Plymouth at 14:27.

RTT at Penzance shows -
1A88 1215 Penzance to London Paddington   This service is cancelled.
This service was cancelled due to a problem with the traction equipment (MD).
AND
5A88 1215 Penzance to London Paddington
Empty Coaching Stock

A fault on the train, but it can run through to Paddington empty?

Door fault?  Aircon intake fault - filling passenger cabin with diesel exhaust?

Oh, happy memories of first generation DMU heating!

That kerosene and sulphur smell that took your breath away!

Sooo, first gen DMU heating... how'd it work?

Mark

AI generated answer:


It's AI generated, but corresponds well with my recollection of the heaters on the Park Royal sets we had on the WSR in the mid/late 1970s

If you want to know more, the Railcar Society website has a useful WR guide to DMU heaters:

https://www.railcar.co.uk/documentation/

Scroll down the page a little to find it

A manual for the Smiths heaters can be found by scrolling a little further

Now I'm down a rabbit hole:

https://preserved.railcar.co.uk/documentation/tsu-89-99-heaters.pdf

[Edit: to add information]

A nice problem to have -
1A84 1020 Penzance to London Paddington
Left Penzance as 5 cars.
9 added at Plymouth!
Showing 14 cars to London!

Carting those 9 out of use I think

Reminded me of the 23-car lash up through Tonbridge :):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jta4c9FMmCA

Is there a theoretical maximum of IETs that can be coupled together?

Yes, as specified for passenger operation it's two units and 312 m - twelve vehicles. Given the unit lengths in existence that means only trains that actually operate now.

For ECS and rescue modes, twice that is allowed. That means any train operating now can rescue any other, but it does not have to haul anything longer than it is. Thus some theoretical possibilities such as 5+5+5+9 might be allowed as ECS, but not for rescue (i.e. with passengers on board the rescued train).

Totally confused on this one,did 14 coaches actually make the journey from the west of England to Paddington?

If it did how was the train accommodated at Paddington?

I would be surprised if 14 carriages made Paddington.  Maximum platformed is 12 IET carriages (but how would you do that?) in Platform 1, but a long lead out past the old parcels / mail platform without points might provide an exceptional ability to handle more?

From the sectional appendix PDF - here (https://sacuksprodnrdigital0001.blob.core.windows.net/sectional-appendix/Sectional%20Appendix%20full%20PDFs%20June%202025/Western%20&%20Wales%20Sectional%20Appendix%20June%202025.pdf):

(https://www.wellho.info/pix/sap_padd_ww_20250824.jpg)

If that "26 chains" on the left is the distance to the first point, then physically 20 carriages of 26 metres could just fit in there.

08:27 Plymouth to London Paddington due 11:59
Facilities on the 08:27 Plymouth to London Paddington due 11:59.
Will be formed of 8 coaches instead of 10.

One carriage locked out of use I wonder?
It then forms the 12:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:05
Will be formed of 8 coaches instead of 10.

16:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 17:37
Will be formed of 8 coaches instead of 10.

18:00 London Paddington to Plymouth due 21:31
Will be formed of 8 coaches instead of 10.

Finally 5C25 2202 Plymouth to Laira T.& R.S.M.D.

This is a well-known issue on RTT, there's a recent thread on Rail UK Forums which explains how it happens:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/22-coach-pendolino.290852/ (https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/22-coach-pendolino.290852/)

Wonder how long it'll be before this 'problem' in RTT is raised again?

The Intercity Express Train (IET) fleet is currently experiencing a reduction in available units due to an increase in GU (Generator Unit) faults, which are under investigation by Hitachi. As a result, there will be a rise in short-formed and cancelled services while Hitachi develops an engineering solution. In the event of an incident this will impact service recovery due to the need to keep traction on certain diagrams.

Could this explain 3 x 165 on a Bristol (Temple Meads) to Reading train recently?

Has there EVER been a week when IETs have not been short formed due to faults ?

There has been a varying dog's dinner from day to day of allocations on diagrams this week, no doubt to utilise what is available.. As well as short-forming and cancellations there has also been long-forming of 10 vice 9 and 9 vice 5. Only the last is a real pleasant surprise.

Have the Tanat Valley still got those Pacers to sell ;D?

They should have kept the HSTs ! not forever of course, but until the wretched IETs could work reliably enough to provide a full service.

Not sure if your statement could grammatically be classified as an oxymoron...............but it certainly seems to contradict itself. Will the IETs EVER provide a full, reliable service ?  ;)  They already seemed to be suffering from premature problems of old-age, long before the initial into service problems have been resolved.

I recently spent several hours between Bath and Maindee Jct (mostly at BRI) and did notice, at the time, that the vast majority of IETs we saw/passed were only 5 car units. The only 9 car I can definitely remember seeing was outside WSB, heading towards BRI............as ECS !

And how many years is it since my now famous crystal ball predicted that the new trains "would in practice be mainly 5 car units"
Such views were widely criticised as being unduly negative.

Things may be getting better though.

The 18:00 Temple Meads to Paddington was just a five car, but by 19:00 the Temple Meads to Paddington was up to 9 cars, and the train arriving into Temple Meads fromn London was ten.

To say they are ‘mainly five car units’ isn’t really correct. The odd service runs with five when it should be more but the majority of trains leaving London have nine or ten coaches, as planned.

The Oxford Clarion (https://bsky.app/profile/oxfordclarion.bsky.social/post/3m5gv7fw2gs2y) has the reason for the awful performance on the North Cotswold....

Update on the units that have had crack repairs completed, and those still to do - courtesy of Richard Clinnick, on his socials recently -

From 800301 on RailUKforums:




Edited to clarify quotes

Across the whole entire GWR IET fleet, there’s approximately 100 engines isolated.  If they’re rectifying 3 a day, that’ll be over a months worth of worth excluding new failures.  Add to that, the countless speed restrictions in place because of track defects and the picture is grim.

And the time of year with drivers driving defensively…though the IET fleet is easily the best at dealing with slippery conditions of the types of train I have driven over the years.

05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:54
Facilities on the 05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:54.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10. There are no reservations on this service.

5 all the way to Paddington (again).

..........and this'll be cosy too, especially as it's Friday.

18:36 London Paddington to Plymouth due 22:10
Facilities on the 18:36 London Paddington to Plymouth due 22:10.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9. There are no reservations on this service.

Correctly formed in the end...as usually seems to happen when there is so much notice given of an alteration to WoE services.

05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:54
Facilities on the 05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:54.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.

Another 5 car unit all the way to Paddington.
Very cozy  ::)

Two 5 cars out today
07:10 Penzance to London Paddington due 12:29
Facilities on the 07:10 Penzance to London Paddington due 12:29.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.

And
08:35 Plymouth to London Paddington due 12:05
08:35 Plymouth to London Paddington due 12:05 will no longer call at Newbury.
This is due to overcrowding as this train has fewer coaches than normal.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10.

Here's a very interesting, and frankly ludicrous and potentially dangerous development.

An IET ran out of fuel at Lipson Junction this week as it was running with isolated GUs, meaning the other available engines eventually shut down due to fuel starvation.  Having no running GUs meant the train eventually shut down all services as the batteries ran out - lighting, toilets, PA, GSM-R, TMS etc.

Luckily, as it was near Laira depot, a rescue train could be sent out to tow it to Plymouth, but even still, this took 3 hours!

1C98 2104 London Paddington to Plymouth
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:P08345/2025-11-19/detailed#allox_id=0

Not good for those travelling down to Devon and Cornwall this evening with both the 17.03 and 18.03 Paddington to Penzance terminating well short of their final destination at Exeter and Taunton respectively. ‘Train fault’ reason given, one is losing time and probably wouldn’t make it up the south Devon banks.

I thought that an IET with only one engine was able to ascend inclines, though slowly.
After all, the electric version has only one engine, and can allegedly "limp home" on diesel power.

Question comes - do you WANT it to "limp home" or cut your losses and send it to the nearest depot?  We have had reports here on occasions in the past of trains / locomotives taking an age and a half getting back from where they are in a crock siding (Castle Cary, Taunton in memory) to somewhere they can be fixed, much to the disruption of other services.  I suspect you would not want "Limping Lulu"s filled with irate, delayed passengers trolling along through Devon with a string of other fitter IETs and Voyagers crawling teach signal behind amid also filled with delayed passengers.

Regarding the ex 17.03: It did “limp home” but without any passengers. On how many engines I know not and if it even made it to Laira as RTT only shows times to Lipsom Junction.
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:31792/2025-11-22/detailed

The 18.03 terminated at Taunton with RTT reporting thst this was due to a problem with doors. This service was restarted at Exeter through to Penzance using the train that formed the 16.35 Paddington to Paignton service which terminated at Exeter.

Reports appearing that GWR IETs are having problems with the fuel pumps on the Generating Units.
This is affecting numerous units

https://x.com/cmpd_date/status/1993100923288404229?s=61&t=VlafMC5gF9tidw36b1Y8JQ

https://x.com/gordondudman/status/1994021321836032219?s=61&t=VlafMC5gF9tidw36b1Y8JQ

https://x.com/chimewhistle/status/1993707713839485201?s=61&t=VlafMC5gF9tidw36b1Y8JQ

Any suggestions why it's happening now - what's changed?

The reports (from last month) say it's run time from new, so the whole fleet is potentially affected. The cure is simple enough - replace every fuel pump. But it's not quick, as the GU has to be dropped for access, so only a few can be done per day. The other issue is that if a pump's innards disintegrate before the replacement happens, bits can end up in places in the engine where they cause further damage.

Same problem from last month's discussion

5 Car trains running today
13:55 Paignton to London Paddington due 17:07
Facilities on the 13:55 Paignton to London Paddington due 17:07.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9. There are no reservations on this service.

AND
17:36 London Paddington to Plymouth due 21:25
Facilities on the 17:36 London Paddington to Plymouth due 21:25.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9. There are no reservations on this service.

07:10 Penzance to London Paddington due 12:57
Facilities on the 07:10 Penzance to London Paddington due 12:57.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10 to Bristol Temple Meads. There are no reservations on this service.
No additional coaches waiting at Plymouth.
Cozy.
In addition the service shows Bristol Temple Meads [BRI]
Service stops to drop passengers off only  (yeh, right!).

I see Penzance has lost the 0503 Paddington service, and all services (today?) run via Bristol.
Why?

Taunton to Castle Cary line is closed all week for drainage works.

08:35 Plymouth to London Paddington due 12:06
08:35 Plymouth to London Paddington due 12:06 will no longer call at Newbury.
This is due to overcrowding as this train has fewer coaches than normal.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9. There are no reservations on this service.

This would make sense - I'm right in thinking that the 802s are GWRs own trains that they specced at the higher power rating for the GUs?, while the 800s are those that Hitachi own & specced to the DfT requirement & are lower rated?

So putting the 800s under less long-distance working off the wires? Ties in with the amended timetable starting on January 5th....

Asking questions that perhaps I should not:

* Is there some logic in having a more "cyclic" timetable which allows trains to be longer in summer and shorter in winter, allowing for more units to be under heavier maintenance when traffic levels are lower?  I appreciate that there are Newquay and Pembroke Dock difference already - though are those more vestiges of history?

* A modest thinning out of tourist services during the winter would allow for staff training to catch up and (ducks!) for staff to take their holidays away from the peak  :D.

* An adding of a few minutes here and there into schedules to avoid working trains to the extreme, though noting that the cycle length increase would tend to add the need for another train in the cycle, or reduce the frequency considering how short most turn rounds are already

* Saving trains / stock and improving reliability and even some frequencies by having long distance trains pick up some intermediate calls.  I could horrify Devon friends by suggesting that the Exeter - Paignton stopper every 30 minutes could, once every 2 hours, be the through train from London Paddington, for example.

I expect howls of "yes, but" ... but questions asked so "why not" can be explained.

That doesn’t make sense to me unless the issue is related to ownership or age (with the 800 being older than the 802) rather than a mechanical fault.

I say this because, all else being equal, an engine that produces more power usually experiences greater stress and heat, which increases the likelihood of failure compared to a lower-powered unit of the same type.
If the engines in the 800 are being downrated (is this true or are they already down-rated?), that suggests the problem is linked to the extra heat and stress. So, wouldn’t it make more sense to assign the lower-powered units to the longer journeys instead of the higher-powered ones as they presumably have a lower chance of failure? I appreciate that would impact on the timings but better to take longer than not arrive at all.

This was originally the case when they were first introduced but the 800s now have the equivalent power output as an 802.  It’s just a software change. 

As for a timetable change.... The number of GU's isolated has dropped significantly so I can't see them making that decision now.  They believe the problem is related to contaminated fuel (salt specifically)

I grew up in New Milton on the Bournemouth line and there was different timetables in summer and winter back in 1970s and 1980s.

Winter Sundays were completely different with the fasts continuing all stations to Brockenhurst-Weymouth (and no slow trains).  The Lymington Pier service ran to Eastleigh as all stations (except Beaulieu Road which had no trains on Sundays in winter).

Effectively the 3 trains, fast, semi-fast and slow were reduced to one or two trains

So yes it can be done (and presumably in those days it was all worked out manually on graph paper), unlike today where paths can be checked by computer.

So yes can have different timetables, depending on season, and there is examples of it in South West.  Probably just to lazy to be creative these days.

05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:54
05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:54 is being delayed at Truro.
This is due to trespassers on the railway.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10. There are no reservations on this service.

05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:54
Facilities on the 05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:54.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10. There are no reservations on this service

Are FGW still maintaining that the IETs are much more reliable than the HSTs ?

 

09:11 Penzance to London Paddington due 14:29
09:11 Penzance to London Paddington due 14:29 was started from Plymouth.
It will no longer call at Penzance, St Erth, Hayle, Camborne, Redruth, Truro, St Austell, Par, Bodmin Parkway and Liskeard.
This is due to animals on the railway earlier today.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9. Service full and standing. There are no reservations on this service.

url=https://www.railmagazine.com/news/gwr-iet-maintenance-steps-up-as-investigation-suggests-fuel-issues]RAIL catches up....[/url]

Wondering if the abstract from this paper relates to the issue - sodium in biofuels via the manufacturing process used for the fuel.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/26273275

Mark

05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:54
Facilities on the 05:03 Penzance to London Paddington due 09:54.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10 from Plymouth. There are no reservations on this service

04:54 Plymouth to London Paddington due 08:35
Facilities on the 04:54 Plymouth to London Paddington due 08:35.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10. There are no reservations on this service.

04:54 Plymouth to London Paddington due 08:36
Facilities on the 04:54 Plymouth to London Paddington due 08:36.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9. There are no reservations on this service.

06:16 Swansea to London Paddington due 09:24
Facilities on the 06:16 Swansea to London Paddington due 09:24.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 10 to Bristol Parkway.

06:59 London Paddington to Paignton due 10:17
Facilities on the 06:59 London Paddington to Paignton due 10:17.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9. There are no reservations on this service.

10:20 Penzance to London Paddington due 15:38
Facilities on the 10:20 Penzance to London Paddington due 15:38.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9. There are no reservations on this service.

Apologies for the thread drift but seemed appropriate. I recently travelled on one of the EMR new units. The riding seemed to be smoother, but I don't think we reached 15rmph. A big plus was the seats which were soft and comfortable. A downside IMHO was the apparent lack of traffic lights on the reservation system which was not actually in use.