Hull Trains cancellations due to chronic shortage of available rolling stock

[robbeech]

It was our favourite 4-car unit that failed at Hull after only making it as far as there from Beverley. That unit has so far failed every day it has been used since it returned to service for various reasons.

It’s because they haven’t mended the train.

 

[Ben Bow]

It was our favourite 4-car unit that failed at Hull after only making it as far as there from Beverley. That unit has so far failed every day it has been used since it returned to service for various reasons.

A staggering level of incompetence - that they would use their "short" and proven most unreliable unit on what is one of their busiest services of the week. Unbelievable.

 

[DaiGog]

Reluctantly I agree. I wouldn’t like to see that but it’s clear they are not prepared to take the right action to solve this problem. They’re simply not mending the trains. They do seem to run a fairly reliable 2 train service though. It seems that with 2 trains running they work without issues but they introduce a 3rd one and it goes wrong. I’ve no way of telling if the one that has failed today is the one that’s been out of service for the last week and I believe that without access to the records they’re happy to hide behind this.

So to the person that seems to know lots of their workings, do they have 2 trains that are pretty reliable (up to GC standards for example) and 2 that are scrap but can’t bring themselves to accept it?
Do they have to be seen to be attempting to run a 3 train service to fulfil some agreement they have and if they put their hands up and said ‘we can’t mend these’ and ran a 2 train service indefinitely would they fall foul if some agreement or contract and be liable for penalty or prosecution?
And therefore is penalty or prosecution a result that would go on to give worse results for management than the financial penalty of cancellations?

No, the units are largely OK. The four-car one has had a few issues in the last week - not related to it being formed of 4 cars, but things which are annoyingly enough to necessitate removing it from service for limited periods. It's failed again this morning and is being worked on as I type.

There is no hiding from anybody or anything going on - the timetable can be achieved with four reliable units and it will be back to full strength shortly, barring any further failures.

 

[DaiGog]

And that's why it shouldn't be Hull Train's decision, the ORR should step in and give HT a choice - either lose paths so that another operator can use them, or come up with a realistic plan to cover for failures until the 802's are in service.... I take it the ex GWR HST plan is "dead"? Otherwise what is the ORR for?

The job of the ORR is to talk to operators in situations like these, and satisfy themselves that measures are in place to improve matters. As HT continues to trade on the publishesd timetable, one can only assume that the ORR is satisfied with progress at present.

The HST project is not dead, these things just take time.

 

[DaiGog]

A staggering level of incompetence - that they would use their "short" and proven most unreliable unit on what is one of their busiest services of the week. Unbelievable.

Do you know what the loadings were on that service today? Do you know if and when the service was closed for reservations in advance? Do you know if other services had more reservations on than the early southbound?

No, thought not.

 

[westv]

Do you know what the loadings were on that service today? Do you know if and when the service was closed for reservations in advance? Do you know if other services had more reservations on than the early southbound?

No, thought not.

The service is almost always fully reserved.

 

[DaiGog]

The service is almost always fully reserved.

Almost always, yes. However, the 0823 from Hull is similarly busy most days now and at a point in time approximately ten days ago, the 0823 today was busier than the 0600 (as were one or two other services in that diagram) so the decision was taken to use 109 on the early service today. Services have been closed early until December 27th which are planned to be operated with 109.

 

[robbeech]

What’s the excuse for obtaining ticket acceptance on unachievable services ?

1645 GTR at Peterborough yesterday was missed. People had to wait another hour.

Whatever the LNER from Doncaster this morning was missed. In this latter case people have been told ‘tough luck’ you missed it you must wait for the next Hull trains in 2 hours or buy a new ticket.
They won’t answer on social media.

People are wondering whether ticket acceptance actually existed or whether it was a lie. I personally believe it existed and was just booked by pure incompetence not having a clue how long it takes by road but surely you can understand why people are sceptical.

 

[DaiGog]

What’s the excuse for obtaining ticket acceptance on unachievable services ?

1645 GTR at Peterborough yesterday was missed. People had to wait another hour.

Whatever the LNER from Doncaster this morning was missed. In this latter case people have been told ‘tough luck’ you missed it you must wait for the next Hull trains in 2 hours or buy a new ticket.
They won’t answer on social media.

People are wondering whether ticket acceptance actually existed or whether it was a lie. I personally believe it existed and was just booked by pure incompetence not having a clue how long it takes by road but surely you can understand why people are sceptical.

I'm not sure, to be honest. Hull to Peterborough in two hours is not the usual time frame allowed - it could be that the wrong train was requested somewhere along the way and the 1745 was the intended one. I'm just guessing though, and I realise that doesn't help passengers on the day.

 

[ricoblade]

There is no way I'm going anywhere near HT until they've been up and running reliably for quite a while. Luckily I have a choice and can use LNER from Retford, though HT do run at convenient times for me and are generally cheaper.

 

[cactustwirly]

Now that all the SR HSTs have been released from GWR, can GWR not sublease some 802s to HT?

 

[robbeech]

No, the units are largely OK. The four-car one has had a few issues in the last week - not related to it being formed of 4 cars, but things which are annoyingly enough to necessitate removing it from service for limited periods. It's failed again this morning and is being worked on as I type.

There is no hiding from anybody or anything going on - the timetable can be achieved with four reliable units and it will be back to full strength shortly, barring any further failures.

This is typical of the response we get though.

Let’s look at this.

‘The units are largely ok’
....2 of them seem to be, 1 of them sits down before it makes it into passenger service. Every time.

‘The four car has had a few issues’
It fails every time they use it. It’s not fit for passenger service.

‘Not related’
But less things to go wrong as there’s only 4 cars yet still fails every time it’s put into service.

‘Limited periods’
Every time it goes into service.

‘Being worked on’
That will take some convincing. They don’t mend the trains.

‘They don’t hide anything’
They told people to get on a bus to Doncaster yesterday as the train was running. The bus left after it was known that the train was cancelled.
They know the 0727 is cancelled the day after the 1912 is cancelled but darent announce it incase passengers find it useful and change their plans to get to funerals and meetings etc.

‘Back to full strength shortly’
But they don’t mend the trains. And if these faults are all unrelated which there is no evidence either way then it’s clear that they’re going to carry on. Customers are being treated like fools.

‘Barring any other failures’
Which there will be, because they don’t mend the trains.


Edit : Apologies if this post is out of place it failed to send earlier

 

[robbeech]

There is no way I'm going anywhere near HT until they've been up and running reliably for quite a while. Luckily I have a choice and can use LNER from Retford, though HT do run at convenient times for me and are generally cheaper.

With a 1tp2h service though from LNER it’s no wonder we have to rely on ht a bit more

 

[HullRailMan]

A staggering level of incompetence - that they would use their "short" and proven most unreliable unit on what is one of their busiest services of the week. Unbelievable.

Maybe, just maybe, they know more about the loadings a today than you do? As it happens early services across the country tend to quieter over the Christmas holiday period as fewer business journeys are taken.
I love the hyperbole used by some posters on here. Using a train with 4 coaches rather than 5 based on knowledge of reservations is hardly showing a “staggering level of incompetence”.

 

[HullRailMan]

‘Being worked on’
That will take some convincing. They don’t mend the trains

Well it’s back in service......

 

[Mag_seven]

Now that all the SR HSTs have been released from GWR, can GWR not sublease some 802s to HT?

No thanks - GWR have enough IET short forms as it is without introducing the risk of more.

 

[Polarbear]

Maybe, just maybe, they know more about the loadings a today than you do? As it happens early services across the country tend to quieter over the Christmas holiday period as fewer business journeys are taken.
I love the hyperbole used by some posters on here. Using a train with 4 coaches rather than 5 based on knowledge of reservations is hardly showing a “staggering level of incompetence”.

I agree with this comment. Unfortunately, this thread has become little more than a diatribe against Hull Trains, with many inaccurate comments being made, and some posters continuing to suggest "solutions" that cannot be implemented, for reasons already explained within the thread.

Whilst I have a great deal of sympathy for those directly affected by the ongoing issues with the 180's, I have less empathy for those who continue to post inaccurate comments about the way Hull Trains have handled the situation. Whilst I'm not a railway employee, I am aware of some of what has been happening behind the scenes, and am not able (or willing) to impart that on a public forum.

As I have said up-thread, there are a lot of people working hard to try and address the current problems and I do feel that certain posters, in their criticism of HT, aren't prepared to take this into account.

 

[Starmill]

The best thing that those intent on defending HT seem to be able to come up with is "When the trains all work, HT can do a great job." Which, of course, could be said of anything...

 

[Mollman]

I don't quite understand this "they don't mend trains" business. I was under the impression that the maintenance was outsourced and therefor it can't be HT's fault that the 180s aren't being fixed, unless they are refusing to release them from traffic.

 

[rjchapma]

Well it’s back in service......

It is - and it's just left Doncaster 5L, here's hoping it's all working fine.

With regard the negative comments about HT. It's entirely possible HT are working really hard in the background, and have had 10 weeks of rotten luck. But to the passenger the fact that there are still late canceled trains and poorly arranged alternatives that repeatedly leave customers late and or stranded coupled with the lack of any sort of meaningful statement it looks from the outside that there is nothing happening.

I don't know if i've said it here, but the service that HT aim to offer is of great value to those living in Humberside / North Lincs. The criticisms are more aimed at attempting to get HT to remedy the problems more fully.

 

[dgl]

The simple answer to HT's problems is the 180's have always been s**** reliability wise and I don't think it's even possible to fix all the issues that plague reliability, but there is currently no other 125mph options available aside from thee IC125's they are looking at anyway.
It's interesting to see the difference between the relaibilty of the 221/220 voyagers and the 180's (even counting the fact that the voyagers are maintained by the manufacturer and originally owned by them).

 

[DaiGog]

This is typical of the response we get though.

Let’s look at this.

‘The units are largely ok’
....2 of them seem to be, 1 of them sits down before it makes it into passenger service. Every time.

‘The four car has had a few issues’
It fails every time they use it. It’s not fit for passenger service.

‘Not related’
But less things to go wrong as there’s only 4 cars yet still fails every time it’s put into service.

‘Limited periods’
Every time it goes into service.

‘Being worked on’
That will take some convincing. They don’t mend the trains.

‘They don’t hide anything’
They told people to get on a bus to Doncaster yesterday as the train was running. The bus left after it was known that the train was cancelled.
They know the 0727 is cancelled the day after the 1912 is cancelled but darent announce it incase passengers find it useful and change their plans to get to funerals and meetings etc.

‘Back to full strength shortly’
But they don’t mend the trains. And if these faults are all unrelated which there is no evidence either way then it’s clear that they’re going to carry on. Customers are being treated like fools.

‘Barring any other failures’
Which there will be, because they don’t mend the trains.


Edit : Apologies if this post is out of place it failed to send earlier

- ‘The units are largely ok’
....2 of them seem to be, 1 of them sits down before it makes it into passenger service. Every time.

Wrong - it made it into passenger service on Saturday, and again today. Nothing to brag about though, obviously.

- ‘The four car has had a few issues’
It fails every time they use it. It’s not fit for passenger service.

Wrong - see above. As you are not in possession of the facts around its recent failures, or the chain of events connected to the repairs, you are not in a position to state that "It’s not fit for passenger service" as a generalisation.

- ‘Not related’
But less things to go wrong as there’s only 4 cars yet still fails every time it’s put into service.

Wrong - there may be one fewer vehicles, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the same faults won't occur but not affecting as many vehicles. It still has two driving cabs, for example.

- ‘They don’t hide anything’ was in the context of hiding things from the ORR as regards the ability to run a service

- ‘Barring any other failures’
Which there will be, because they don’t mend the trains.

180s are mechanical objects, just like any other train, and will break occasionally (or more often in the case of this particular type). Stating that "they don't mend the trains" is clearly nonsense, or none of them would work. I'm not bothered if you don't believe that the recent run of faults with that unit are unrelated, but I'm not going to dwell on it any longer as we're just going round in circles.

 

[43096]

It's interesting to see the difference between the relaibilty of the 221/220 voyagers and the 180's (even counting the fact that the voyagers are maintained by the manufacturer and originally owned by them).

The Voyagers have never been owned by the builder since they were delivered.

 

[Ben Bow]

....

No, thought not.

Do you know how many people were waiting to see if the service ran before buying a ticket to travel on it? Can you say how many season ticket holders were planning to travel on it? No, thought not.
There is more to cancelling a train than just the absolute numbers of reservations. If people are paying twice the fare to travel on the 06.00 compared to the 08.23 (£91/43 - prices for a single on tomorrow's services) it indicates that they are doing so because they have to. You'd need to sell more than double the tickets for the 08.23 to match the revenue from the 06.26 on those fares, the same goes when the compensation claims start rolling in. They need to protect the customers who are providing the most value to them. Anybody can fill a train if the fares are cheap enough, it's making a profit which matters, especially for HT as an OA operator.

 

[MotorcycleAlan]

I wish all the clever people on this, and many other topics, could get together and bid for a franchise. Then they would find that, with some exceptions of course, the industry is full of dedicated, highly trained professionals, who go beyond the hours they are paid for, to try and deliver a service to the travelling public. And all in a fragmented system totally unfit for purpose. Good luck and happy Christmas to all who try their hardest. Many of us appreciate your efforts.

 

[Polarbear]

Do you know how many people were waiting to see if the service ran before buying a ticket to travel on it? Can you say how many season ticket holders were planning to travel on it? No, thought not.
There is more to cancelling a train than just the absolute numbers of reservations. If people are paying twice the fare to travel on the 06.00 compared to the 08.23 (£91/43 - prices for a single on tomorrow's services) it indicates that they are doing so because they have to. You'd need to sell more than double the tickets for the 08.23 to match the revenue from the 06.26 on those fares, the same goes when the compensation claims start rolling in. They need to protect the customers who are providing the most value to them. Anybody can fill a train if the fares are cheap enough, it's making a profit which matters, especially for HT as an OA operator.

No one knows how many people would be waiting to see if a service ran before buying a ticket though? The main reason for cancelling any train is never down to the reservations (or lack thereof) on any particular service.

 

[Ben Bow]

Indeed, for an OA operator in particular it should be about the "value" of the service to them.

 

[DaiGog]

Do you know how many people were waiting to see if the service ran before buying a ticket to travel on it? Can you say how many season ticket holders were planning to travel on it? No, thought not.
There is more to cancelling a train than just the absolute numbers of reservations. If people are paying twice the fare to travel on the 06.00 compared to the 08.23 (£91/43 - prices for a single on tomorrow's services) it indicates that they are doing so because they have to. You'd need to sell more than double the tickets for the 08.23 to match the revenue from the 06.26 on those fares, the same goes when the compensation claims start rolling in. They need to protect the customers who are providing the most value to them. Anybody can fill a train if the fares are cheap enough, it's making a profit which matters, especially for HT as an OA operator.

No, I don't know how many people would have been waiting to see if the train ran before buying a ticket. But who does?

I do know how to fill a train by pricing it correctly. The 0823 (or indeed any other HT service) is not going to match the profitability of the 0626 because you would never sell twice the number of tickets, even if you fill it - services are priced at what the market will bear in order to sell as many tickets as possible. At 0620 it's close to (or even over) £100, two hours later it's half that. When you have a situation where one train is quieter than another, the sensible decision is to reduce capacity on the quieter one in order to minimise stress and confrontation on board. It's not necessarily about the money and nothing else every time.

 

[HullRailMan]

The armchair experts on here are always full of seemingly simple solutions that don't take into account the reality of the situation.

While I don't think HT management have handled this current situation as well as possible (from a customer's perspective) I don't accept the notion that it is all their fault either. A serious of unrelated issues have come to a head st the same time. I'm sure nobody wanted this to happen.

People need to accept that sometimes things go wrong. A train may fail. A flight may be fog bound. A car journey could be delayed by an accident or roadworks. Just because a journey takes longer than planned doesn't mean it is somebody's fault, things happen!

At the same time the expectations of what can be done at short notice are often unrealistic. Those who thing there are magical fleets of coaches on permanent standby to be deployed at a moments notice. Those who think there are endless numbers of trains available that companies just choose not to use. Those who complain about "dangerous" overcriwding but don't get off the train!

I've said before that using HT is a choice. All their markets are served by other companies. If you don't like them don't use them. Simple really.

 

[Deafdoggie]

And that’s the crucial point. If nobody used them, they’d sit up and take notice & make the customer information much better!
Whilst people keep using them (and posters on here say every train they cancel would have been full and standing) then they’ll carry on as they are, and why not?