Last one that I'm aware of was the 1524 Cleethorpes to Liverpool Lime Street on the 1st March.
The 91s, which are known for being poor performers in the snow, haven’t been pulled by LNER and (famous last words!) haven’t had any in service failures during this cold snap.
I understood lack of crew training was an issue - but is there something fundamentally wrong with the trains themselves?
Less the trains, more the operator!
Very interesting - thanks. I thought there must be a reason like this. At this rate they are going to have other crew competence lapse before the can get them reliably operating again, and have to start over again!
I didn’t assume no sets were out because of no allocations, I worked it out on the basis that every possible service was, at the time I looked, either allocated a 185 or cancelled. The information was correct to the best of my knowledge at the time of posting. Not all of us have access to industry systems to see what’s really happening, we have to rely on what’s available to us.
As the allocation problem stems from industry systems, they will often be of no more help than RTT - hence why RTT is missing the info.
So you know that the cancellation most days of the services that would have used the 68s/Mark5s and the short running or short forming on other TPE services on the CLC don't bother them. You couldn't be more wrong and you fail to want to get to the bottom of the reasons for the current shambles.
So the reason for the short running, short forming and and cancellations on the South Pennine Route but affecting the CLC worst of all is what?. Please do not say TRU route learning since the stories about that suggest only short journeys on the rosters and the bit of the route that seems to get lopped off is Piccadilly to Liverpool via the CLC, about as far West of the TRU diversions as you can get.
Lack of crew, because lack of end gangways on 185s, which requires two sets of crew.
Doesn't explain the dominant short running stopping in the main shed at Piccadilly then going back East. There only needs to be a conductor in the back unit so it does not explain the short forming either if they really have enough 185s to cover the Mk5 routes. There are no crew using the ECS paths for route learning so they can't have any left to train so why not run the Mk5s. I am still not seeing cogent reasoning here.
Are you sure about that?
The reason is the same reason it has stumbled from one crisis to another for the last 5 years. It is an absolute shambles of a company. There are multiple underlying issues and none of them ever seem to be addressed.
