• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Petition to bring back the buffet on GWR

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reliablebeam

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2017
Messages
247
These days I take it with me, having a small rucksack on my back is no great issue while going for a wee/coffee/both. If I'm going somewhere for several days, my bag of dirty clothes can stay on the rack - if they want to nick that, good luck to them.

I would prefer a trolley if the service was reliable - the trouble is they almost never are. For some reason only ScotRail seem to be willing to run the trolley in-house which seems to be necessary to deliver that.

I've started using a similar tactic but once burned..... I also don't want the hassle of work-based paperwork if any of their equipment goes walkabout. I have found the GWR staff will try and let you know if they're stuck, they're often docked in that weird cupboard that I've often mistaken for the bogs.....
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

broadgage

Member
Joined
11 Aug 2012
Messages
1,094
Location
Somerset
GWR have said they're working on how to improve the catering service on their new trains.

The RMT are aware of this. I'll be very cross if there's a strike over this - especially as we're approaching the busy summer period and that I have 3 fantastic GWR trips coming up (one on the 16th and 18th of next month and the 02/06/19 which the June trip is to Liskeard)!

A buffet now would mean more money and more work for GWR and network rail as regards platform lengthening just to accommodate a new buffet carriage. Plus, psyically disabled people would appreciate a trolley service compared to getting up and walking to the buffet car.

Sorry but I'm with GWR on this one - to be fair they're trying to gain customers trust again!

I am very doubtful about GWR claims to be "working on how to improve the catering" Remember the claims made about hot food from the trolley ? sunk without trace.
And the new improved trolleys ? also sunk without trace.
They are not even providing a basic minimum trolley service with any reliability.

The answer IMHO is to admit that the downgrade to trolley only catering was a mistake and to bring back the buffet.
I see no need for any platform lengthening to achieve this. I, and others, have suggested lengthening the 9 car sets to 10 car by adding a buffet car. Platforms that can take a 5+5 IET can accept a 10 car as the overall length is exactly the same.
With a proper full sized hot buffet in the extra vehicle, about 40 or 50 extra seats would also be available. Not a micro buffet or a mini buffet, or a parked trolley, but a proper full sized hot buffet equipped to serve freshly cooked hot snacks, real coffee, and draught beer.
I would place the buffet car in the middle of standard class in order that no standard class passenger has to walk far to use it.

The long walk from first class being of little consequence as table service should be provided in first.
 

Reliablebeam

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2017
Messages
247
I am very doubtful about GWR claims to be "working on how to improve the catering" Remember the claims made about hot food from the trolley ? sunk without trace.
And the new improved trolleys ? also sunk without trace.
They are not even providing a basic minimum trolley service with any reliability.

The answer IMHO is to admit that the downgrade to trolley only catering was a mistake and to bring back the buffet.
I see no need for any platform lengthening to achieve this. I, and others, have suggested lengthening the 9 car sets to 10 car by adding a buffet car. Platforms that can take a 5+5 IET can accept a 10 car as the overall length is exactly the same.
With a proper full sized hot buffet in the extra vehicle, about 40 or 50 extra seats would also be available. Not a micro buffet or a mini buffet, or a parked trolley, but a proper full sized hot buffet equipped to serve freshly cooked hot snacks, real coffee, and draught beer.
I would place the buffet car in the middle of standard class in order that no standard class passenger has to walk far to use it.

The long walk from first class being of little consequence as table service should be provided in first.

I'd respectfully suggest some form of Prosecco bar or Gin selection is more likely to go down well with premium customers these days......

This is all probably going to end in some form of pyrrhic victory where some poor quality buffet is supplied to shut certain shouty groups up at the expense of seats and comfort for people trying to travel long distance. Am I being cynical?
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,231
I am very doubtful about GWR claims to be "working on how to improve the catering" Remember the claims made about hot food from the trolley ? sunk without trace.
And the new improved trolleys ? also sunk without trace.
They are not even providing a basic minimum trolley service with any reliability.

The answer IMHO is to admit that the downgrade to trolley only catering was a mistake and to bring back the buffet.
I see no need for any platform lengthening to achieve this. I, and others, have suggested lengthening the 9 car sets to 10 car by adding a buffet car. Platforms that can take a 5+5 IET can accept a 10 car as the overall length is exactly the same.
With a proper full sized hot buffet in the extra vehicle, about 40 or 50 extra seats would also be available. Not a micro buffet or a mini buffet, or a parked trolley, but a proper full sized hot buffet equipped to serve freshly cooked hot snacks, real coffee, and draught beer.
I would place the buffet car in the middle of standard class in order that no standard class passenger has to walk far to use it.

The long walk from first class being of little consequence as table service should be provided in first.

Clearly I am hallucinating whenever hot bacon rolls are offered for sale on morning peak IETs.

You have been told before whenever you float this scheme, or variations of it, on this forum and elsewhere that there are a number of locations on GWR where 10-car trains do not fit - one of them is half-a-mile up the road from me right now, but a nine-car set works perfectly well there.

You are also well aware that the old FGW Travelling Chef service lost money hand over fist - as you were reminded on the GW Passengers' Forum only yesterday - so why on earth do you keep going on about freshly-cooked hot snacks as though they are some magic remedy that will transform the fortunes of on-train catering? Even the sainted VTEC/LNER buffet is clearly of the mini-buffet variety with 'bung it in the microwave' hot food service.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
I am very doubtful about GWR claims to be "working on how to improve the catering" Remember the claims made about hot food from the trolley ? sunk without trace.
And the new improved trolleys ? also sunk without trace.
They are not even providing a basic minimum trolley service with any reliability.

The answer IMHO is to admit that the downgrade to trolley only catering was a mistake and to bring back the buffet.
I see no need for any platform lengthening to achieve this. I, and others, have suggested lengthening the 9 car sets to 10 car by adding a buffet car. Platforms that can take a 5+5 IET can accept a 10 car as the overall length is exactly the same.
With a proper full sized hot buffet in the extra vehicle, about 40 or 50 extra seats would also be available. Not a micro buffet or a mini buffet, or a parked trolley, but a proper full sized hot buffet equipped to serve freshly cooked hot snacks, real coffee, and draught beer.
I would place the buffet car in the middle of standard class in order that no standard class passenger has to walk far to use it.

The long walk from first class being of little consequence as table service should be provided in first.

You do realise there might be other reasons why the maximum train formation for a single unit is 9 cars? For example, the maximum available length in maintenance sheds, etc.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,783
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I'd respectfully suggest some form of Prosecco bar or Gin selection is more likely to go down well with premium customers these days......

This is all probably going to end in some form of pyrrhic victory where some poor quality buffet is supplied to shut certain shouty groups up at the expense of seats and comfort for people trying to travel long distance. Am I being cynical?

A microbuffet, which would take about 8-10 Standard seats, would be a pragmatic solution, yes.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,783
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
You are also well aware that the old FGW Travelling Chef service lost money hand over fist - as you were reminded on the GW Passengers' Forum only yesterday - so why on earth do you keep going on about freshly-cooked hot snacks as though they are some magic remedy that will transform the fortunes of on-train catering? Even the sainted VTEC/LNER buffet is clearly of the mini-buffet variety with 'bung it in the microwave' hot food service.

Are they convection microwaves? If not, why not? People consider hot food heated in those (e.g. Starbucks) a premium offering.
 

HamworthyGoods

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2019
Messages
3,927
I am very doubtful about GWR claims to be "working on how to improve the catering" Remember the claims made about hot food from the trolley ? sunk without trace.
And the new improved trolleys ? also sunk without trace.
They are not even providing a basic minimum trolley service with any reliability.

The answer IMHO is to admit that the downgrade to trolley only catering was a mistake and to bring back the buffet.
I see no need for any platform lengthening to achieve this. I, and others, have suggested lengthening the 9 car sets to 10 car by adding a buffet car. Platforms that can take a 5+5 IET can accept a 10 car as the overall length is exactly the same.
With a proper full sized hot buffet in the extra vehicle, about 40 or 50 extra seats would also be available. Not a micro buffet or a mini buffet, or a parked trolley, but a proper full sized hot buffet equipped to serve freshly cooked hot snacks, real coffee, and draught beer.
I would place the buffet car in the middle of standard class in order that no standard class passenger has to walk far to use it.

The long walk from first class being of little consequence as table service should be provided in first.

How would lengthening 9 car IETs to 10 cars get you buffet cars on West Country services?

You will find the majority of Cornish services are made up of pairs of 5 car IETs, this is because Long Rock at Penzance cannot accommodate 9 car IET sets so anything which starts or finishes there has to be a 5 car or 10 car made up of 2x5 car (and stabled separately on two roads)
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,231
Are they convection microwaves? If not, why not? People consider hot food heated in those (e.g. Starbucks) a premium offering.

All you are doing is putting pre-prepared plastic-wrapped items in a microwave. Not my idea of premium.

Travelling Chef could arguably have been given that description, with the food cooked on board the train, but sadly the service did not come close to breaking even, which was why GWR stopped providing it.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
How would lengthening 9 car IETs to 10 cars get you buffet cars on West Country services?

You will find the majority of Cornish services are made up of pairs of 5 car IETs, this is because Long Rock at Penzance cannot accommodate 9 car IET sets so anything which starts or finishes there has to be a 5 car or 10 car made up of 2x5 car (and stabled separately on two roads)

It's almost like some sort of expert thought about these things before placing the order for a large investment in rolling stock. Crazy.
 

HamworthyGoods

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2019
Messages
3,927
It's almost like some sort of expert thought about these things before placing the order for a large investment in rolling stock. Crazy.
That’s why the sets ordered for the west of England were predominantly 5 cars with the 9 cars primarily for Oxford and Cotswolds due to the Long Rock issue.
 

Sleepy

Established Member
Joined
15 Feb 2009
Messages
1,540
Location
East Anglia
That’s why the sets ordered for the west of England were predominantly 5 cars with the 9 cars primarily for Oxford and Cotswolds due to the Long Rock issue.
You would have thought making Long Rock capable of accepting longer trains would have been 1st consideration when ordering new stock - but then DfT were involved of course.......
Great for revenue protection with 5+5 !!
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,783
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
You would have thought making Long Rock capable of accepting longer trains would have been 1st consideration when ordering new stock - but then DfT were involved of course.......
Great for revenue protection with 5+5 !!

There are plenty of TOCs that use or have used several non-gangwayed units in multiple with one guard (or indeed none). They manage it. The solution is not to have a stupid rule not permitting unstaffed units, so the guard or other revenue staff can unit-hop at a station en-route as necessary. Not every TOC has such a rule - it appears to me to only be GWR and Northern?

You would need two trolleys, but to be honest a 9-car needs two trolleys as well unless people are to be served very infrequently.
 

HamworthyGoods

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2019
Messages
3,927
There are plenty of TOCs that use or have used several non-gangwayed units in multiple with one guard (or indeed none). They manage it. The solution is not to have a stupid rule not permitting unstaffed units, so the guard or other revenue staff can unit-hop at a station en-route as necessary. Not every TOC has such a rule - it appears to me to only be GWR and Northern?

You would need two trolleys, but to be honest a 9-car needs two trolleys as well unless people are to be served very infrequently.

EMT and XC don’t allow pairs of voyagers/Meridens without a second guard type person.

GWR it’s only on HSS on west local services it’s fine 143s etc)
 

HamworthyGoods

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2019
Messages
3,927
You would have thought making Long Rock capable of accepting longer trains would have been 1st consideration when ordering new stock - but then DfT were involved of course.......
Great for revenue protection with 5+5 !!

It’s not a simple solution at Long Rock, hence 5 cars.
 

Bishopstone

Established Member
Joined
24 Jun 2010
Messages
1,473
Location
Seaford
On balance, I would have preferred retention of a buffet service, but undertaking a retro-fit would involve considerable CapEx. This would have to be funded through the fare box, or taxation.

People (me included, sometimes) complain that fares are high enough as it is. Meanwhile, if I have to pay more in taxes, I’d rather the money go to social care, schools or the police, than buying buffet provision for IETs.

So it’s a no from me.

Also, students of railway retro-fit as a process will be aware of the Thameslink class 700 case study, where half of the fleet was delivered without WiFi and seat back tables. Three years on, despite the promise of retro-fit of these items, the matter of who pays for it remains deadlocked and the upgrades are effectively dead.
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,129
There are plenty of TOCs that use or have used several non-gangwayed units in multiple with one guard (or indeed none). They manage it. The solution is not to have a stupid rule not permitting unstaffed units
Of course, but GWRs decision to settle their strikes by agreement to scrap all DCO proposals for IETs (other than a few former Turbo services) meant the only realistic option to prevent a dispute continuing was to sign up to operating agreements unions had approved & had in place elsewhere, for similar non DOO stock /routes
 
Last edited:

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
Travelling Chef could arguably have been given that description, with the food cooked on board the train, but sadly the service did not come close to breaking even, which was why GWR stopped providing it.
I liked it, but I was only maybe 30% successful at booking onto chef services (including some unplanned unavailability) and I knew they existed which most passengers seemed not to, based on the interest when I returned to my seat with decent hot food instead of the usual microwaved turd.

It felt like typical GWR: do something to curry favour, then do it half-hearted and hard to use, then say there's no demand and kill it.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,783
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I liked it, but I was only maybe 30% successful at booking onto chef services (including some unplanned unavailability) and I knew they existed which most passengers seemed not to, based on the interest when I returned to my seat with decent hot food instead of the usual microwaved turd.

Yet as I mentioned above, the new high-performance combi ovens (which were mainly brought to the UK by Subway, but have been popularised in Starbucks and many other establishments) make the "microwaved turd" genuinely quite good by avoiding sogginess. I'm not quite sure why TOCs haven't fitted these.

There are also things that microwave well, though - chillis, curries, pasta dishes etc where you can barely tell. I do note VTWC have started stocking chilli pots and the likes - why stick with soggy gristleburgers when you can choose something more suitable for that form of preparation? Even for breakfast, sack off the soggy bacon butties and offer sausage, bacon, egg and beans mixed pots instead? Eat seem to do a decent trade in these.
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
Yet as I mentioned above, the new high-performance combi ovens (which were mainly brought to the UK by Subway, but have been popularised in Starbucks and many other establishments) make the "microwaved turd" genuinely quite good by avoiding sogginess. I'm not quite sure why TOCs haven't fitted these.
Because a turd is still a turd even if dried out by grilling it a bit. The establishments you mention are last-resort lowest common denominator things.

There are also things that microwave well, though - chillis, curries, pasta dishes etc where you can barely tell. I do note VTWC have started stocking chilli pots and the likes - why stick with soggy gristleburgers when you can choose something more suitable for that form of preparation?
Yep, that sort of stuff would be better if we can't have real food, but we're told customers want turds, right up until we're told they're not putting buffets in the new units because not enough customers wanted turds! :rolleyes:
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
You would have thought making Long Rock capable of accepting longer trains would have been 1st consideration when ordering new stock - but then DfT were involved of course.......
Great for revenue protection with 5+5 !!

How do you know it wasn't looked at and subsequently discounted (high cost without sufficient benefits)?

£m s of infrastructure work for the privelidge of making people walk to get a coffee and a bacon sandwich.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,783
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Because a turd is still a turd even if dried out by grilling it a bit. The establishments you mention are last-resort lowest common denominator things.

I don't agree - Starbucks is much more "premium" than say Spoons' chip-fryer-and-microwave fare, and the nuked paninis are really quite good. Not only that, but they keep better than regular sandwiches do.
 

irish_rail

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2013
Messages
3,858
Location
Plymouth
There are plenty of TOCs that use or have used several non-gangwayed units in multiple with one guard (or indeed none). They manage it. The solution is not to have a stupid rule not permitting unstaffed units, so the guard or other revenue staff can unit-hop at a station en-route as necessary. Not every TOC has such a rule - it appears to me to only be GWR and Northern?

You would need two trolleys, but to be honest a 9-car needs two trolleys as well unless people are to be served very infrequently.
One big problem with that is who resets the call for aid alarms if no staff in the unit? And call for aid is a very regular occurrence I can assure you.
 

irish_rail

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2013
Messages
3,858
Location
Plymouth
It’s not a simple solution at Long Rock, hence 5 cars.
Would still work out cheaper in the long run to extend long rock probably too late now but a few years ago the descion could of been made. And there is no excuse for trains starting at Laira or north pole to be 5 car formed.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
Would still work out cheaper in the long run to extend long rock probably too late now but a few years ago the descion could of been made. And there is no excuse for trains starting at Laira or north pole to be 5 car formed.

How is it 'cheaper in the long run'? More infrastructure to maintain and more, longer trains running around all day than is necessary.
 

Randomer

Member
Joined
31 Jul 2017
Messages
317
One big problem with that is who resets the call for aid alarms if no staff in the unit? And call for aid is a very regular occurrence I can assure you.

Catering staff if suitably trained? Certainly seen them do so today on LNER when somebody pushed the call for aid by accident in the 1st class disabled toilet.

Obviously very TOC dependent but is resetting a disabled call for aid (e.g. in a toilet or at disabled seating position) rather than a call for aid/passcom restricted to safety critical staff on GWR?
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,783
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
One big problem with that is who resets the call for aid alarms if no staff in the unit? And call for aid is a very regular occurrence I can assure you.

The same way it's done on 12.319 formations from tomorrow on LNR.

I don't know how that is specifically, but that TOC clearly doesn't consider it a problem.

I suspect for a call for aid (as distinct from the red handle) it might involve stopping at the next station out of course?
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,129
One big problem with that is who resets the call for aid alarms if no staff in the unit? And call for aid is a very regular occurrence I can assure you.
I’m fairly sure on the latest stock that can be reset remotely (assuming it’s not an emergency) via an intercom & control screen either by the guard / suitably trained onboard staff member or driver on fully DOO services.
 
Last edited:

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,783
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Catering staff if suitably trained? Certainly seen them do so today on LNER when somebody pushed the call for aid by accident in the 1st class disabled toilet.

Obviously very TOC dependent but is resetting a disabled call for aid (e.g. in a toilet or at disabled seating position) rather than a call for aid/passcom restricted to safety critical staff on GWR?

LNR will, from tomorrow, be running 12-car Class 319 formations in which one unit will have no member of staff, safety critical or otherwise. As noted, they don't consider this a problem. There are end doors but these aren't safe to use while in motion, if indeed they can be used to move between units at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top