• 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!

GWR Turbo cascade progress to Bristol region services

Status
Not open for further replies.

SWT_USER

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2010
Messages
858
Location
Ashford Middx
Currently on a rammed 166 on the Cardiff to Portsmouth corridor. Air conditioning has failed, window hoppers closed and short formed to 3 coaches (missing the 165 so absolutely packed and the guard can’t get through) due to I presume ‘A fault on this train’ (usually the standard reason given for short forms) - Will things ever get better on this route? :(

Don't hold your breath for a quick fix. GWR and predecessors never bothered to properly fix the air con in 20 years working local services out of Paddington :frown:
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

fgwrich

Established Member
Joined
15 Apr 2009
Messages
9,250
Location
Between Edinburgh and Exeter
Do we roughly know how reliable the service has been since the transfer of the Turbos to the route? I spotted a rather full and standing (and toilet locked OOU) 2 car 165 on a Cardiff - Portsmouth service on Saturday evening - gather the 166 was removed at Bristol due to low fuel.
 

Parallel

Established Member
Joined
9 Dec 2013
Messages
3,927
Do we roughly know how reliable the service has been since the transfer of the Turbos to the route? I spotted a rather full and standing (and toilet locked OOU) 2 car 165 on a Cardiff - Portsmouth service on Saturday evening - gather the 166 was removed at Bristol due to low fuel.
I’m not too sure about the whole route, on the whole things seem to have improved on the local all stops Bristol - Westbury services though. The only two services that stand out for the wrong reasons are the 06:44(?) Weymouth to Bristol Parkway and the 16:40 Gloucester to Weymouth as they have gone from 4 car 150s between Westbury and Bristol to 3 car 166s. Not a great improvement in capacity (if at all) and are regularly overcrowded and get delayed due to dwell times at stations between Bristol and Westbury. I wonder if GWR has any plans to strengthen these to 5 car for part of the journey in the future. We’ll see how things cope in the summer as 5 car 15x combos leave from Weymouth crush loaded in the summer.

5 car Turbos in Pompey to Cardiff are not bad to travel on, however the ex first class areas are usually full with less people actually occupying the ex-standard class seats. Draw your own conclusions from that! In terms of punctuality, I don’t know enough to comment... Yet.
 

northernbelle

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2018
Messages
679
Do we roughly know how reliable the service has been since the transfer of the Turbos to the route? I spotted a rather full and standing (and toilet locked OOU) 2 car 165 on a Cardiff - Portsmouth service on Saturday evening - gather the 166 was removed at Bristol due to low fuel.

Historic PPM data for the Cardiff – Portsmouth route:

Reporting Period
1907 58%
1908 63%
1909 59%
1910 76%
First Turbos introduced here:
1911 77%
1912 76%
1913 72%
2001 77%

Performance has increased significantly in the last few periods, but this is mainly thanks to the benefit of Filton 4-tracking and a significant improvement in High Speed performance as a result of IETs/electrification.

In a recent presentation given by GWR, there was an acknowledgement that performance could still be better, although Pompey-Cardiff is an inherently difficult route to fit trains on.

As for any direct performance data regarding Turbos themselves, I'm not sure - although train crews report they are a fraction slower than the 158s between stops, but better on dwell time.
 

northernbelle

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2018
Messages
679
I think we’d all like to see that. The question is who is going to pay for them?

Do I think the Turbos are ideal replacements for the 158s on the Cardiff-Portsmouth line? Not really, but they do bring with them the extra capacity desperately needed on this line.

I think if you were to ask most passengers getting a seat would be high on their list of priorities.

Absolutely - it's a shame that comfort has to be compromised by capacity, but capacity is the highest priority on the route at the moment - I travel regularly on Turbos on most of the routes around the Bristol area and generally the conditions have been improved since the Turbos came on the scene.

Plenty of work to do as highlighted on here, but things do appear to be heading in a positive direction.
 

VT 390

Established Member
Joined
7 Dec 2018
Messages
1,366
Are the 165/166 units due to get a full interior refurbishment any time soon?
 

Right Away

Member
Joined
18 May 2016
Messages
199
Historic PPM data for the Cardiff – Portsmouth route:

Reporting Period
1907 58%
1908 63%
1909 59%
1910 76%
First Turbos introduced here:
1911 77%
1912 76%
1913 72%
2001 77%

Performance has increased significantly in the last few periods, but this is mainly thanks to the benefit of Filton 4-tracking and a significant improvement in High Speed performance as a result of IETs/electrification.

In a recent presentation given by GWR, there was an acknowledgement that performance could still be better, although Pompey-Cardiff is an inherently difficult route to fit trains on.

As for any direct performance data regarding Turbos themselves, I'm not sure - although train crews report they are a fraction slower than the 158s between stops, but better on dwell time.
Thanks for these. They make for interesting reading. I also believe that there has been a long overdue change regarding internal regulating decisions involving these services. With only a 5 minute delay constituting a PPM failure for these services, the old attitude that 'London' trains always have priority over the Pompey services has been relaxed.
 

Class43165

Member
Joined
18 Jun 2019
Messages
61
Won't some 165/166's be kept in the Thames Valley for Banbury to Didcot Parkway services? I imagine they won't electrify out to Banbury.
 

JN114

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2005
Messages
3,346
Won't some 165/166's be kept in the Thames Valley for Banbury to Didcot Parkway services? I imagine they won't electrify out to Banbury.

Didcot - Oxford - Banbury electrification comes under the “Electric Spine” project; which I understand is just deferred, not cancelled. That will eventually see 387s on the Didcot/Oxford/Banburys.

Until then a small contingent of Turbos will remain in the Thames Valley fleet to work the Greenford and Marlow branches (2 car) plus the Didcot/Oxford/Banbury shuttles. The balance of services will be covered by a mix of 387s, 769s and IETs.
 

supervc-10

Member
Joined
4 Mar 2012
Messages
701
And presumably the Henley and Windsor branches? Can't see them being electrified. Although both could be a good opportunity for battery units.
 

FGW_DID

Established Member
Joined
23 Jun 2011
Messages
2,724
Location
81E
And presumably the Henley and Windsor branches? Can't see them being electrified. Although both could be a good opportunity for battery units.

No, 769s, as mentioned by JN114, will (eventually!!) take care of those.

Add the Basingstoke Branch services as well, seeing as they haven’t been mentioned.
 

Parallel

Established Member
Joined
9 Dec 2013
Messages
3,927
06:00 Portsmouth - Cardiff has thrown up a seemingly random allocation from the services I’ve travelled on this week.

Monday - 166 + 165
Tuesday - 166 only
Thursday - 158 + 150
Friday - 2 x 150
 

pompeyfan

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2012
Messages
4,181
06:00 Portsmouth - Cardiff has thrown up a seemingly random allocation from the services I’ve travelled on this week.

Monday - 166 + 165
Tuesday - 166 only
Thursday - 158 + 150
Friday - 2 x 150

I suppose now they’re at the point where all Bristol DMUs can now be used as a common pool, so doesn’t matter what turns up. Only exception to that is if the diagram is booked to attach/detach during the day. Don’t want to try and hitch a turbo onto the back of a sprinter.
 

pompeyfan

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2012
Messages
4,181
Several 2 and 3 car 150s on the Pompey - Cardiff’s lately. Assume there’s lots of unit issues.
 

Parallel

Established Member
Joined
9 Dec 2013
Messages
3,927
Looks to be lots of unit issues indeed with possibly 158s and Turbos. 06:00 Pompey to Cardiff 2 x 150 again today for the third time within the last week, and the 16:40 Gloucester - Weymouth formed of 2 x 150 (booked single 166) CIS advertising ‘Formed of 2 coaches’ so I assume another 150 was bolted on at Bristol.
 

Parallel

Established Member
Joined
9 Dec 2013
Messages
3,927
Looks to be lots of unit issues indeed with possibly 158s and Turbos. 06:00 Pompey to Cardiff 2 x 150 again today for the third time within the last week, and the 16:40 Gloucester - Weymouth formed of 2 x 150 (booked single 166) CIS advertising ‘Formed of 2 coaches’ so I assume another 150 was bolted on at Bristol.

Naturally the 06:44 Weymouth to Bristol Parkway was formed of 1 x 150 this morning due to poor availability of Turbos. Is so crushloaded, people are being left behind on the platforms, next train in 27 minutes.
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
4,923
Had a 3 car 158 instead of a doubled up 165 today on the 08:41 BRI - WEY. Wasn't actually too bad despite the people heading for Glastonbury, but sounds like GWR are a few Turbo's down still.
 

envirommc

Member
Joined
4 Oct 2017
Messages
19
I see today 1/7 2019 in Portsmouth that class 166,s have had letter added to the coaches ie A,B,C and class 165,s are D,E. Is this now they are all going to be on the Cardiff to Portsmouth route.
 

PHILIPE

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Nov 2011
Messages
13,472
Location
Caerphilly
I see today 1/7 2019 in Portsmouth that class 166,s have had letter added to the coaches ie A,B,C and class 165,s are D,E. Is this now they are all going to be on the Cardiff to Portsmouth route.

That's the reason. This was initiated many moons ago.
 

SWRtrain_fan

Member
Joined
18 Dec 2018
Messages
378
Location
Berkshire
Sorry if this has already been mentioned previously, but when are all 166s expected to transfer to Bristol because I still see a few on the North Downs line?
 

JN114

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2005
Messages
3,346
Sorry if this has already been mentioned previously, but when are all 166s expected to transfer to Bristol because I still see a few on the North Downs line?

When the 769s to replace them have been introduced into service. There’s unlikely to be any further transfers West until that time, indeed some notionally “west” sets may come back east to help release the remaining 7 387s to the HX program.
 

Beemax

Member
Joined
10 Dec 2018
Messages
141
When the 769s to replace them have been introduced into service. There’s unlikely to be any further transfers West until that time, indeed some notionally “west” sets may come back east to help release the remaining 7 387s to the HX program.

Oh No. Not more Turbos replacing 387s on the Reading-Paddington stoppers. My wife comes home in a grumpy mood every time that happens. It's bad enough when it's a 6-car but very often it's a 3-car.
 

broadgage

Member
Joined
11 Aug 2012
Messages
1,094
Location
Somerset
GWR should be providing new trains for all its services.

Disagree.
The age of the trains is IMHO of little importance. Much higher priorities are IMO.
Trains long enough that everyone gets a seat, except in extreme and unusual circumstances.
Reasonable comfort, decent legroom and no more 2+3 seating.
Reliably working toilets.
Reliably working air conditioning.
Generally in good condition, some old trains have been refurbished to a good standard, and some newer ones leave a lot to be desired.

New trains should not in my view be specified simply for being new !
New trains should be obtained under the following circumstances, IMHO.
1)When the existing fleet is inadequate for growing passenger numbers.
2) When new trains will "pay for themselves" by lower maintenance and other running costs.
3) When the old trains are not compliant with modern requirements, and costs of modification are excessive.
4) To standardise on one type of train in the interests of simplifying training, rostering, and maintenance. For example if a hypothetical operator had 60 IETs and 4 class 158s, it might be worth replacing the 4 odd trains with IETs to give a uniform fleet.
 

JN114

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2005
Messages
3,346
It's bad enough when it's a 6-car but very often it's a 3-car.

No it isn’t.

The off-peak 6 car Turbo that replaced 387s in May has been short-formed 3v6 exactly 4 times since the timetable change on 20th May; on the 32 weekdays it has been diagrammed a 6 car. On an equal number of occasions it’s been long formed with an 8 car 387.

4 days in 32 is not “very often”.
 

cactustwirly

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2013
Messages
7,447
Location
UK
Oh No. Not more Turbos replacing 387s on the Reading-Paddington stoppers. My wife comes home in a grumpy mood every time that happens. It's bad enough when it's a 6-car but very often it's a 3-car.

To be fair they were almost always 3 cars in the off-peak before the stoppers became 387s
 

Non Multi

Member
Joined
11 Dec 2017
Messages
1,117
Oh No. Not more Turbos replacing 387s on the Reading-Paddington stoppers. My wife comes home in a grumpy mood every time that happens. It's bad enough when it's a 6-car but very often it's a 3-car.
Only 5 and a half more months of substitute Turbos, then it's the 9 car TfL 345s with the super-hard seats, super-loud door alarms, lots and lots and lots and lots of standing space, full colour destination displays and absolutely nothing else.
 

JohnRegular

Member
Joined
12 Dec 2016
Messages
253
It's said a lot across this forum, but I notice people seem much less inclined to sit next to eachother in 2+3 seating; on a semi-busy Cardiff service earlier an noticed quite a few standees in the vestibules despite many unoccupied seats. Whilst the Turbos are an improvement, this seating lends itself very poorly to the Pompey-Cardiff route.
Another observation that someone may know more about- why are the bike spaces on turbos too short for most bikes? They inevitably end up sticking out into the aisle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top