Class 175 to GWR

[Benjwri]

Ultimately if reoccuring and not being changed, someone in control or maintenance is not doing strong enough feedback so it gets looked at and changed.

This is a really poor attitude, blaming the staff. Knowing people who work in the railway, I know how hard they push to make things better, right from the top, and how hard they work to make do with what they have. This isn't a decision to just not bother, it comes right from the top in the DfT and ultimately the Treasury. There just isn't the money. No one on the railway controls that, and they do push but it gets nowhere because they are so fair down the chain.

Surely you have come across numerous instances in whatever job you do where you are ignored in your plea for something?

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

“Someone’s diagramming too many units.”



Righto Sherlock, which booked services (DfT mandated) do you want left uncovered? Maybe dust off the old Regional Railways plan - fortunately never implemented - to run certain Cornish branch lines on alternate days with the same unit?

The fact that GWR are (hopefully) to take on an additional 27 DMUs, with a handful of HSTs to be withdrawn and no really substantial additional timetable plans, the odd single unit requirement here and there notwithstanding, shows you just how tight the resources are at the moment. There is literally no wiggle room for the planners whatsoever. You should be patting them on the back for achieving what they are, with what they have.
(Sorry for the rant, it just touched a bit of a nerve!)

 

[GoneSouth]

Maybe dust off the old Regional Railways plan - fortunately never implemented - to run certain Cornish branch lines on alternate days with the same unit?

Seriously? I hadn’t heard of this, shocking! Welcome to Cornwall, the next train is in 3 days! Whose master plan was this, and would that shared unit have been a pacer by any chance?

Shudder to think what could have happened over the years!

 

[fgwrich]

I think we’re digressing somewhat here, heading towards the now locked GWR Cancellations thread.

Going back to the 175s, with the standstill period now over, hopefully it won’t be long before we start seeing Ely to Laira moves - and for a change something actually coming out of Laira heading for a future in the west.

 

[Clarence Yard]

A long explanation of the make do mentality, without considering why ended up in that situation.

Unfortunately no attempt to explain why insufficient spares are in the fleet (or if there is a fixed quantity of units, why someone has over diagrammed them (too many diagrams for quantity) so on some days they cannot find enough because of repairs and works visits.

Quite simply in your example if on one day each fortnight can only muster 9 (not 10) out of 12 then the problem is direct result of the choice to over stretch the fleet. We are not talking a freak event when excess units are unexpectedly out of service, but a regular every few days occurrence. If it happens more than handful of days each year then clearly expectations about availability are misplaced, and need revising.

And of course the older the units, or how non standard they are, also increases the number of parts needed, and if parts are slow to obtain (due to obsolescence) the higher the proportion can be expected to be out of use, so need to diagram less.

Ultimately if reoccuring and not being changed, someone in control or maintenance is not doing strong enough feedback so it gets looked at and changed.

Everyone at GWR knows the position but they can do naff all about it. The DfT tells you how many units you get, what services you have to run and effectively sign off your LTP diagrams. Of course, with minimum resources, it’s all going to fall apart on occasions, especially with a network of services that covers a large geographical area with multiple locations where units outstable at night.

You seem to think that GWR can do something radical about it. They can’t, except to try and get more resources in before the DfT tell them to kill the HST sets. Until then it is make do and mend, stretching the fleet as far as it can go and sometimes beyond.

In the past GWR has been quite successful in boosting their local fleet and when the 175 units arrive, it will make a huge difference to their ability each morning to put out what they are supposed to.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Seriously? I hadn’t heard of this, shocking! Welcome to Cornwall, the next train is in 3 days! Whose master plan was this, and would that shared unit have been a pacer by any chance?

Shudder to think what could have happened over the years!

It was during the slightly bonkers early 1990s period running up to privatisation when BR was being funded on annual (?) settlements and they usually got a certain percentage less than they anticipated. This forced radical choices to be made, for example reducing route frequencies drastically and, in this case, considering diagramming one unit to cover two branches (I think it was Par-Newquay and Liskeard-Looe would have essentially shared the same Class 153?)

Anyway off topic, it didn’t come to that. Just be thankful saner heads have prevailed. There was also a very low period in about 2007 when FGW were forced to bustitute certain branch lines due to fleet shortages - again, not something anyone wishes to return to.

 

[GoneSouth]

It was during the slightly bonkers early 1990s period running up to privatisation when BR was being funded on annual (?) settlements and they usually got a certain percentage less than they anticipated. This forced radical choices to be made, for example reducing route frequencies drastically and, in this case, considering diagramming one unit to cover two branches (I think it was Par-Newquay and Liskeard-Looe would have essentially shared the same Class 153?)

Anyway off topic, it didn’t come to that. Just be thankful saner heads have prevailed. There was also a very low period in about 2007 when FGW were forced to bustitute certain branch lines due to fleet shortages - again, not something anyone wishes to return to.

Maybe it wasn’t all bad, maybe it was visionary, the first glimpse of the Cornwall Metro with direct services from Newquay to Looe and Falmouth. The only shame being it ran once per day to hit each station at least once!

I jest obviously, thanks for the information, shocking. Look at how many passengers use the train in Cornwall now, and so much potential for increase in Newquay.

Going back to the 175s, with the standstill period now over, hopefully it won’t be long before we start seeing Ely to Laira moves - and for a change something actually coming out of Laira heading for a future in the west.

Do we know if the 175s are going for a GWR green makeover or are they staying in TfW red and white?

 

[pompeyfan]

Do we know if the 175s are going for a GWR green makeover or are they staying in TfW red and white?

It was speculated that the red would just be vinyled green however judging how the 769s were turned out anything is possible, including a full interior and external rebrand / refurbishment. Depends how much the treasury wants to cough up I guess!

 

[Snow1964]

It was speculated that the red would just be vinyled green however judging how the 769s were turned out anything is possible, including a full interior and external rebrand / refurbishment. Depends how much the treasury wants to cough up I guess!

The 769s were about 31 years old when done, the 175s will be about 25 years old in 2025. Both were probably expected to do 6-12 years in their new roles.

It is also possible to think backwards, and decide if they will need a repaint and re trim during their expected usage period. If yes, it's more a decision on when (the timing) to spend the money and do the work, rather than if it can be afforded.

 

[jayah]

That is absolute rubbish.

I have been involved in such delivery on different diesel fleets and it is relatively easy to do, if you have the resources to do it or you set your train plan and depots up to deliver it.

What GWR have been trying to do, with minimum resources, is not going to deliver it reliably, especially as the stock is getting older and spares are taking longer to procure. The west fleet is hopelessly stretched and the slightest failure in the infrastructure can blow the train plan, not only for that day but, thanks to the amount of units outstabling, for the morning run out on the following day.

It's relatively easy to do, but nobody actually manages to do it?

GWR, East Midlands, TfW, Cross Country even LNER.

Nobody who plans more than one diesel unit ever delivers them with anything like the same reliability and the non cancellation rate for services operated by a single unit.

A plan with coupled diesel units is a plan that won't be delivered.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Repeating the same garbage doesn’t make it true.

The salient point here is if you run a fleet to the limit of its availability and beyond, you are going to short form or cancel. If you run multiple formations, you short form first.

I have been involved in running various diesel fleets in nearly 50 years service on the railway and that has involved the near perfect daily provision of coupled diesel units, on more than one fleet too. It isn’t really very hard, providing you have the right number of units, enough depot capacity and the men and materials to fix them.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

I think what is being (indirectly) demonstrated here, is that UK diesel train fleets have been routinely overstretched for so long, that the resulting unreliability of the trainplan has become analogous with the fleets themselves.

Out of interest @Clarence Yard what level of availability did BR require of its diesel fleets and how does that compare to today?

 

[FGW_DID]

I think what is being (indirectly) demonstrated here, is that UK diesel train fleets have been routinely overstretched for so long, that the resulting unreliability of the trainplan has become analogous with the fleets themselves.

Out of interest @Clarence Yard what level of availability did BR require of its diesel fleets and how does that compare to today?

It would be interesting to compare if those Stats are available.
For comparison purposes , during my time at the depot (starting 2013) when all the Turbos were based at Reading, daily SX requirement was normally 51 from 57 (89.5%)
Currently daily SX requirement is 20 from 24 (83%).

 

[Clarence Yard]

I have always worked on around 85% for 15x stock with towards 90% for 16x being optimal, the latter because Reading Upper and Lower Triangle were set up from the start especially to cope with that. Thames at one time operated 51/52 out of 58 on their native fleet, with one allowed for C4/works repairs.

However, I would now be dropping a 15x and 16x to around 80%. The duty cycle on GWR west takes the units away from their maintenance locations so that has to be factored in, together with the fact that the units are now taking longer to fix.

With some fleets the maths takes you below 80% so you can cross cover a mixed fleet but the key thing here is never diagram over your target availability % with any one class - you want to bag the headroom when things go wrong.

So, for example, if I had 18 units of one type, I would now never diagram 15 of them (83.3%), I would go for 14 (77.7%). That gives me three for ordinary maintenance and repairs and one for longer term stuff. If I diagrammed 15, that only leaves me 2+1 for the respective categories - not enough to give you reliable delivery.

Preferably you never split and join within the day for services between service groups but you need to have enough units to create that slack in the diagrams. Traditionally, that’s where you could get your on the day spares from.

 

[507020]

So, for example, if I had 18 units of one type, I would now never diagram 15 of them (83.3%), I would go for 14 (77.7%). That gives me three for ordinary maintenance and repairs and one for longer term stuff. If I diagrammed 15, that only leaves me 2+1 for the respective categories - not enough to give you reliable delivery.

But say for example you have a fleet of 18 158s and 18 165s aiming for on average 80% availability of both. Why couldn’t you diagram 15 or 16 158s, but only 12 or 13 165s, so you aren’t demanding more than 80% availability of your DMU fleet, only within one class, when you can cross cover with the other?

 

[The exile]

Nobody who plans more than one diesel unit ever delivers them with anything like the same reliability and the non cancellation rate for services operated by a single unit
A plan with coupled diesel units is a plan that won't be delivered.

Any stats will always be skewed by one simple fact: if you’re a unit down, what do you do? Cancel train A (and its next working) which is formed of a single 3-car unit, or reduce train B from 2 units to 1 and run both?
As others have pointed out, the issue mostly arises from operators being forced to oversweat assets to satisfy bean-counters.

 

[Snow1964]

But say for example you have a fleet of 18 158s and 18 165s aiming for on average 80% availability of both. Why couldn’t you diagram 15 or 16 158s, but only 12 or 13 165s, so you aren’t demanding more than 80% availability of your DMU fleet, only within one class, when you can cross cover with the other?

It doesn't work properly on GWR because there are services like Portsmouth-Cardiff, where many are double units (but not 2 x 3car), and alternate trains are 158 and 16x.

As the two different types can't couple need spare of each type, and as it takes about 2.5 hours to get a spare from main depot to the outstation at Fratton (Portsmouth end) it is arguable need additional spares at the remote outstations.

Whats more these are being worked intensively and are 32-34 years old, with spare parts that are hard to get. Which reduces the chance of sufficient units being available further.

Really at their age should be assuming 3-5 of the 175s are simply replacing older 158s and 16x that are taking longer to fix. It is nowadays quite common to have a handful of them stopped longer term, so because this is virtually continuous (if not always the same units) in practice it's similar to having a handful withdrawn or stored unserviceable (which in normal world would get replacements brought in).

Reality is the train service level and frequency provision (agreed with DfT), doesn't have enough units to run reliably everyday. So short forms (and hideous crowding) are common. There is bad trade off, short form or cancel train. Passenger gets there uncomfortably on first, but gets delay repay on second choice, so might prefer second option, but rail operators usually try and do the run two short trains option.

 

[Falcon1200]

Out of interest @Clarence Yard what level of availability did BR require of its diesel fleets and how does that compare to today?

Before privatisation I was involved in the operational control of the DMU (and EMU) fleets working out of Glasgow Central. On the route towards Edinburgh via Shotts there was one evening peak train, IIRC around 1720, booked to be a 6-cars (pre Sprinters). We simply never had enough sets and the train always ran 3 vice 6.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Reality is the train service level and frequency provision (agreed with DfT), doesn't have enough units to run reliably everyday. So short forms (and hideous crowding) are common. There is bad trade off, short form or cancel train. Passenger gets there uncomfortably on first, but gets delay repay on second choice, so might prefer second option, but rail operators usually try and do the run two short trains option.

There is a third option - introduce an emergancy timetable with fewer services so there are enough units run the required service level reliability everyday. But of course that would mean making a big noise about how bad the situation actually is rather than being able to sweep it under the carpet and pretend it isn't happening.

 

[Benjwri]

There is a third option - introduce an emergancy timetable with fewer services so there are enough units run the required service level reliability everyday. But of course that would mean making a big noise about how bad the situation actually is rather than being able to sweep it under the carpet and pretend it isn't happening.

Or of course they could just cut the set lengths down in the planned diagrams.

I maintain that this forums obsession with cutting its nose of despite its face, in that it believes no service is a better option than a short formed service, does not reflect that of the wider public.


You’ve still got the same amount of trains, so on average the crowding is the same (More people on a longer train, because they’re less frequent, or less people on a shorter train), so the only difference you’re making is the trains are less frequent, further increasing people’s discontent.

 

[The exile]

Or of course they could just cut the set lengths down in the planned diagrams.

I maintain that this forums obsession with cutting its nose of despite its face, in that it believes no service is a better option than a short formed service, does not reflect that of the wider public.


You’ve still got the same amount of trains, so on average the crowding is the same (More people on a longer train, because they’re less frequent, or less people on a shorter train), so the only difference you’re making is the trains are less frequent, further increasing people’s discontent.

I think most passengers would prefer a thinned out timetable where trains were near-as-no-difference guaranteed to run to one where loads of trains fail to run on the day because there physically aren’t enough trains or crew for all the advertised services. Not so sure that the same applies to short-forming, especially as the number of occasions when it is physically impossible (as opposed to undesirable) to get on to a short-formed train is mercifully rare.

 

[Benjwri]

I think most passengers would prefer a thinned out timetable where trains were near-as-no-difference guaranteed to run to one where loads of trains fail to run on the day because there physically aren’t enough trains or crew for all the advertised services. Not so sure that the same applies to short-forming, especially as the number of occasions when it is physically impossible (as opposed to undesirable) to get on to a short-formed train is mercifully rare.

Yes obviously when they are commonly cancelled that’s a different story and I agree an emergency timetable is better, however most GWR issues are short forms, not cancellations, which as you say are not deserving of an emergency timetable.

 

[Harpo]

Unfortunately no attempt to explain why insufficient spares are in the fleet (or if there is a fixed quantity of units, why someone has over diagrammed them (too many diagrams for quantity)

Nought to do with diagramming. Fleet management will have agreed an availability level (number of sets in traffic) and planners utilise them to the level agreed.

Availability targets will include allowances for works and maintenance programmes including troughs and peaks (odd days/times) when extra sets can be diagrammed ‘off maintenance’.

However, s**t happens. Trains hit objects, big failures can happen randomly and skilled people or spares (or their funds!) can become difficult to get.

Life away from the armchair is tough.

 

[yorkie]

There is an update:

Great Western Railway's acquisition of '175s' confirmed with 2025 introduction planned

A total of 27 units will move to GWR and potentially run in the south west until 2032

www.railmagazine.com

The transfer of 27 Class 175 diesel multiple units to Great Western Railway took a step closer when the Department for Transport confirmed GWR’s intention to award a contract to Angel Trains for the leasing of 70 Class 175s - comprising 16 three-car sets and 11 two car sets.

The trains are to be in traffic from May 2025 on Devon and Cornwall routes, and the contract will have provisions to potentially run until 2032.

GWR says the 100mph units will operate over steep gradients, with a minimum fuel range of around 1,000 miles. They will run in two-, three-, four and five-car formations - with selective door opening where necessary owing to short platforms.

The units (175001-011 and 175101-116) have been in store in various locations such as Landore, Crewe, Ely, Chester and Holyhead since Transport for Wales took the decision to dispense with the Alstom units in 2023, following the delivery of sufficient new CAF Class 197s to take over their duties.

The ‘175s’ were delivered in 1999-2000 following their ordering by First North Western.

Named Coradias by Alstom, the units had a troubled start and were late into traffic, but soon settled down on the North Wales Coast and other FNW operations. They moved to Arriva Trains Wales and then became part of the TfW operation.

They will require some to get them fit for passenger use after several months out of use.

The move will allow GWR to eliminate the last remaining ‘Castle’ Class HSTs, as well as redeploying Class 158/166s to other routes to strengthen services.

Once there is a firm update on exactly where the units are going, please feel free to report this post so that this thread can be unlocked for those updates.

If anyone would like to speculate regarding potential uses of 175s on GWR, please feel free to post in Speculative Discussion.

 

[Mag_seven]

Thread unlocked to allow an update from @TurboMan

 

[TurboMan]

Thanks @Mag_seven . The first two class 175 units are due to move to Laira later this month, one 2-car on 19th November, one 3-car on 26th. This is for the start of traincrew/engineering familiarisation, but the units won't be seen on the mainline just yet.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Will some of the fleet be available for the start of the next timetable or will the Castles persevere into 2025?

 

[sh24]

Welcome news for GWR passengers.

 

[John R]

Will some of the fleet be available for the start of the next timetable or will the Castles persevere into 2025?

If traincrew and engineering familiarisation only start at the end of November with just two units transferred, it seems a stretch to think that some will be available by mid-December.

 

[Express380]

Thanks @Mag_seven . The first two class 175 units are due to move to Laira later this month, one 2-car on 19th November, one 3-car on 26th. This is for the start of traincrew/engineering familiarisation, but the units won't be seen on the mainline just yet.

Will they be coming down on own power or dragged?