TT-ONR-NRN
Established Member
There must be some talk of drastic action by now surely? It can’t continue.
No denying that they’re noisy and I can see why If they’re sat around idling (especially at night) it could get on someone’s nerves.sensitive ears of Scarborough folk
Why can't the loco from HD01 be used on HD03?Some exams are being brought forward and done on rakes whilst they're on depots. After HD01 gets back to Crewe on Thursday it goes onto its heavier B exam which should see its 5th car added. HD03 has no loco still so may be that HD01 becomes the first 5 car now.
Down to 3 locos now thats why the diagrams dropped even more down to just the absolute minimum. 1 then has to operate as a rescue both North and South that's why only 1 diagram can run with 3 locos available.Why can't the loco from HD01 be used on HD03?
Surely as you say there's a pool of 8 loco's with 4 currently available, loco's can be swapped around easily?
I completely agree with you. TfW is a farce. Last week I had my Manchester train cancelled at the last minute and had to drive to Manchester Airport- I will never use TfW to get to north again- so unreliable and completely tin eared to the suffering us passengers are going through. Passengers like me don’t care if the diesel engine is a locomotive at the front or a diesel engine under the floor- what we want is a train that turns up on time.There must be some talk of drastic action by now surely? It can’t continue.
I completely agree with you. TfW is a farce. Last week I had my Manchester train cancelled at the last minute and had to drive to Manchester Airport- I will never use TfW to get to north again- so unreliable and completely tin eared to the suffering us passengers are going through. Passengers like me don’t care if the diesel engine is a locomotive at the front or a diesel engine under the floor- what we want is a train that turns up on time.
Oh so you were making a trip to the airport and didn’t give yourself breathing space for issues during the travel to the airport?I completely agree with you. TfW is a farce. Last week I had my Manchester train cancelled at the last minute and had to drive to Manchester Airport- I will never use TfW to get to north again- so unreliable and completely tin eared to the suffering us passengers are going through. Passengers like me don’t care if the diesel engine is a locomotive at the front or a diesel engine under the floor- what we want is a train that turns up on time.
How on earth do you know that? It’s frustrating when people seem to try and deflect the poor performance of their TOC onto someone else, or make out their complaints are unreasonable. I don’t know what the purpose of doing that is, perhaps for fear of a senior viewing the forum and being seen as bad-mouthing the TOC, I have no clue, but it’s not very fair.Oh so you were making a trip to the airport and didn’t give yourself breathing space for issues during the travel to the airport?
Something could just have easily happened whilst driving. For example, your car broke down ?
100%, but perhaps (and I HATE saying this, because I always absolutely loved IC225s and thus liked the idea of the MK4s coming across) another part of the problem is using coaches whereby a long and complicated modification is used to work with the locomotive, thus severely limiting the flexibility of operations should locomotive availability be poor.What's really needed is a fleet of locos where more than 27% of the fleet are available to use.
Sadly very true.I completely agree with you. TfW is a farce. Last week I had my Manchester train cancelled at the last minute and had to drive to Manchester Airport- I will never use TfW to get to north again- so unreliable and completely tin eared to the suffering us passengers are going through. Passengers like me don’t care if the diesel engine is a locomotive at the front or a diesel engine under the floor- what we want is a train that turns up on time.
I have to completely agree. The 197s are perfectly pleasant and very well suited to the route in their booked 5 carriage formations (3 carriage for some off peak Holyheads), and carry much more capacity anyway. The 67+MK4s are perfectly pleasant, don’t get me wrong, and I’ve had some lovely rides on them - if they weren’t so grubby and off brand they’d be lovely with a bit more capacity and the announcements canned - but they’re more trouble than they’re worth.The Mk4 situation is laughable. It is a vanity project to say that TfW runs "Intercity" trains. If they were "Intercity" they would still be running in their original longer formations. The truth is that there are 2.5 (maybe about to be 3.5) carriages of standard and 1 carriage of first. Whilst each Mk4 has more seats than a carriage in a 197, the 5-car 197 has many advantages (not least that half of it can run if the other half has issues). Instead what we have is something that simply does not deliver.
Sorry but how could you know how much 'breathing space' someone has allowed for a journey to the airport? A cancelled hourly service would likely make me do the same as the service an hour later couldnt be be relied upon to be on time or turn up either.Oh so you were making a trip to the airport and didn’t give yourself breathing space for issues during the travel to the airport?
Something could just have easily happened whilst driving. For example, your car broke down ?
I totally agree and it frustrates me also. I get that TFW staff need to be loyal to their employer and not be seen to bring the company into disrepute, but those of us that are customers are entitled to complain about a poor service. It frustrates me that TFW seem to just get away with this shocking standard of service at times and just tell us it will get better in a few months. Well here we are into 2024 and we were told early on in 2023 things would be better from the Dec 2023 timetable change. Well here we are and apart from the very welcome 197s which is an improvement in my opinion we still have far too many Sprinters on long distance services and short formations (2 cars when we were promised 4 or 5 cars by now)How on earth do you know that? It’s frustrating when people seem to try and deflect the poor performance of their TOC onto someone else, or make out their complaints are unreasonable. I don’t know what the purpose of doing that is, perhaps for fear of a senior viewing the forum and being seen as bad-mouthing the TOC, I have no clue, but it’s not very fair.
Yes that is also a major issue. And that results in passengers having to catch the next available service from Crewe or Wilmslow which is often a Northern stopper. There also seems to be an issue with punctuality when trains come from West Wales to Manchester and Cardiff. I cant work out what the issue is but they lose time often between arriving and departing Swansea. And there doesnt seem to be anything being attached/detached that could delay things. This then has an impact on other services, if there is a Swanline behind it that departs late too. Capacity is also an issue on this route. As nice as the 197s are in my opinion 2 carriages just isnt enough.The further problem with TfW and the Marches is that they cannot provide a guarantee that the train will even reach Manchester if it does run. So many turn around short, that even allowing for travel on the train 1 hour later to still get you to your destination on time is not sufficient.
The Mk4 situation is laughable. It is a vanity project to say that TfW runs "Intercity" trains. If they were "Intercity" they would still be running in their original longer formations. The truth is that there are 2.5 (maybe about to be 3.5) carriages of standard and 1 carriage of first. Whilst each Mk4 has more seats than a carriage in a 197, the 5-car 197 has many advantages (not least that half of it can run if the other half has issues). Instead what we have is something that simply does not deliver.
It would make me do the same as well. I could have left three or four hourly trains worth of breathing space, but if the first was cancelled (and many other services are, let's face it - it isn't a rarity), I wouldn't put it past the next two or three not to be cancelled as well, and would take to the road. It wasn't the most fair or kind assumption.Sorry but how could you know how much 'breathing space' someone has allowed for a journey to the airport? A cancelled hourly service would likely make me do the same as the service an hour later couldnt be be relied upon to be on time or turn up either.
The longer formations are actually coming through thick and fast now (a lot of 4 cars and a few of the long-awaited 5 cars on Manchester - North & South, and most Holyheads are producing 3 cars as planned) it's wonderful to see. The roll out of longer formations has been held back by the issues faced over November/December when the storm damaged some 197s, and also as the hopeless D-Train junk can't do their job by themselves two are being taken up there too. Putting us nicely back on topic of this thread (it's easy to forget it's not a master thread for TfW's many issues), the Mark 4 availability is at it's poorest yet right now, and the vast majority of the Sprinters are filling in for those, not 197s.Well here we are and apart from the very welcome 197s which is an improvement in my opinion we still have far too many Sprinters on long distance services and short formations (2 cars when we were promised 4 or 5 cars by now)
Good to hear the longer formations are starting. Most ive seen recently have been 2 or 3 car West of Cardiff although i did spot a 5 car formation on Sunday which was impressive but I put that down to it being a Sunday and less trains overall needed so longer formations which is often the case on a Sunday.It would make me do the same as well. I could have left three or four hourly trains worth of breathing space, but if the first was cancelled (and many other services are, let's face it - it isn't a rarity), I wouldn't put it past the next two or three not to be cancelled as well, and would take to the road. It wasn't the most fair or kind assumption.
The longer formations are actually coming through thick and fast now (a lot of 4 cars and a few of the long-awaited 5 cars on Manchester - North & South, and most Holyheads are producing 3 cars as planned) it's wonderful to see. The roll out of longer formations has been held back by the issues faced over November/December when the storm damaged some 197s, and also as the hopeless D-Train junk can't do their job by themselves two are being taken up there too. Putting us nicely back on topic of this thread (it's easy to forget it's not a master thread for TfW's many issues), the Mark 4 availability is at it's poorest yet right now, and the vast majority of the Sprinters are filling in for those, not 197s.
It's a shame they can't stick two 150s on the Borderlands line so that the 197s they're using there can cover the long-distance stuff. The problem is, assumedly, 197s being based in Chester and 150s being based in Cardiff.Unfortunately they probabaly have more 150s 'spare' than 197 at the moment so we are likely to get them on Mark 4 booked workings.
Unfortunately that is now proving to be the weak link of the plan and now DB have put up for sale most of the non-tfw 67 fleet, including one that has been used until 2 days ago it does leave it with an extremely limited pool to change. As far as I know one more loco is being modified, but after that theres not much left that can be done with 67s.100%, but perhaps (and I HATE saying this, because I always absolutely loved IC225s and thus liked the idea of the MK4s coming across) another part of the problem is using coaches whereby a long and complicated modification is used to work with the locomotive, thus severely limiting the flexibility of operations should locomotive availability be poor.
As it stands I'd say that's the least likely option. Firstly there's no money and I'd be amazed if any more 197s in their current form were ordered. The interior is nice enough but behind all that the units are full of issues still.if they're going to bite the bullet and get more 197s in to replace them (and the 230s if they have any sense), it's in the customer's best interests that they decide to sooner rather than later.
How on earth do you know that? It’s frustrating when people seem to try and deflect the poor performance of their TOC onto someone else, or make out their complaints are unreasonable. I don’t know what the purpose of doing that is, perhaps for fear of a senior viewing the forum and being seen as bad-mouthing the TOC, I have no clue, but it’s not very fair.
The point is, the Welsh railway service cannot be relied on, and it’s that which needs to be addressed, not however long before Tom125 turns up before a flight, or whether I'm a "serial offender" of complaining too much about the service. Without doubt, many staff work really really hard to keep this disasterous TOC afloat, and I completely and fully understand and appreciate that, but any denial that there is, regardless, a serious problem somewhere that needs fixing at TfW, is just silly. Because this can’t go on. And disruption for customers aside, it can’t be pleasant to work through either, surely?
At least despite the uselessness of the 230s and MK4 sets, the 197s are settling in very well and I'm very grateful and happy to see so many serving Cardiff in the place of nasty 150s. It's just a shame more weren't ordered so that the 230/MK4s wouldn't be needed.
Sorry but how could you know how much 'breathing space' someone has allowed for a journey to the airport? A cancelled hourly service would likely make me do the same as the service an hour later couldnt be be relied upon to be on time or turn up either.
There are issues, no doubt, nor do I dispute that there aren’t. Excluding 230’s and MK4’s (at least as much as I know), there are things actively being done to resolve the issues.Without doubt, many staff work really really hard to keep this disasterous TOC afloat, and I completely and fully understand and appreciate that, but any denial that there is, regardless, a serious problem somewhere that needs fixing at TfW, is just silly. Because this can’t go on. And disruption for customers aside, it can’t be pleasant to work through either, surely?
I wouldn’t go on any form of social media and bring them into disrepute, I value my job far too much.I totally agree and it frustrates me also. I get that TFW staff need to be loyal to their employer and not be seen to bring the company into disrepute, but those of us that are customers are entitled to complain about a poor service. It frustrates me that TFW seem to just get away with this shocking standard of service at times and just tell us it will get better in a few months. Well here we are into 2024 and we were told early on in 2023 things would be better from the Dec 2023 timetable change. Well here we are and apart from the very welcome 197s which is an improvement in my opinion we still have far too many Sprinters on long distance services and short formations (2 cars when we were promised 4 or 5 cars by now)
Canton was 7 150’s short this morning for their booked workings so I’m not even so sure on that at this point.Unfortunately they probabaly have more 150s 'spare' than 197 at the moment so we are likely to get them on Mark 4 booked workings.
What I worry about, is how long the 67 problems will continue for
I agree it’s concerning, with DB selling up 67’s and seem to be pulling out of the UK market, I don’t think they’ve got much interest in ensuring TFW have locos when needed.Unfortunately that is now proving to be the weak link of the plan and now DB have put up for sale most of the non-tfw 67 fleet, including one that has been used until 2 days ago it does leave it with an extremely limited pool to change. As far as I know one more loco is being modified, but after that theres not much left that can be done with 67s.
They were trying to get more freedom to carry out mods etc with a new maintenance contract based on the current model.I agree it’s concerning, with DB selling up 67’s and seem to be pulling out of the UK market, I don’t think they’ve got much interest in ensuring TFW have locos when needed.
It would be nice to see TFW purchase the locos off DB and bring it in-house, although I appreciate that’s incredibly unlikely.
I wouldn’t go on any form of social media and bring them into disrepute, I value my job far too much.
Just because TFW are **** at the moment doesn’t mean that people should blame them for their own failings either though, allocating blame appropriately and all that. I’ll just re-iterate incase it’s lost, I totally appreciate the shocking level of service that gets provided for the expensive tickets that people pay for (In my opinion).
Equally TFW don’t “get away” with it. They get fined serious sums of money for every cancellation and all of the delay they cause.
They’re undertaking huge projects to make it better, brand new trains, more coaches on those trains, more frequent trains. What more do you want them to do ? And equally, what do you want them to say (that isn’t telling a lie) ?
I believe the splitting of the Manchester-West Wales services every 2 hours resulted in 1 extra diagram.This thread was created in May 2019, the first Mark 4 came into service on 7th June 2021. In Apr 21 it was announced TFW were picking up 4 more ex GC sets. It's now Jan 2024 and what are the results? Only 1 out in service.
HD08 has never materialised and HD03 seems to have disappeared off the face of the earth, just to get 1 extra coach added.
Similarly to the Class 230's and 769's, how long will TFW keep up this farce?
The time and money spent to get 7 of these sets into service, with little consistent and positive results, seems a complete waste.
There's currently only 4 diagrams, with 5 expected once all sets in service.
It would make much more sense to just get 5 or 6 more 3 car 197's with first.
The mk4 diagrams have some wastage on where they go into Canton before coming back out. There's also wastage within the West Wales - Cardiff diagrams that connect with incoming Manchester Mk4's where they go into Canton or shunt to Pengam. With a tidying up of diagrams along with a standardised 197 fleet that can continue past Cardiff to Swansea would mean more efficient unit usage which could compensate for the 0.5 carriage loss as is currently. TFW have already said there will be a slight surplus in 197 availability which could mean more 5 or 6 cars on the peak time services, resulting in an actual capacity increase over the Mk4's. IF First becomes well used with a more reliable service then maybe look at extending First to a full 197 carriage, or even seeing if there's an option for a 4 carriage 197 with a whole carriage of First.
Revisit the idea of having a First class with kitchen loco + stock if and when a better loco becomes available an more of the marches / SWML line is electrified. The on board meals are fantastic, but is a top notch cooked meal really necessary? Could a smaller kitchen and simplified menu be sufficient to provide a decent cooked breakfast and decent but not overly fancy evening meal?
Not to everyone. You cannot rightfully claim to know what everyone prefers, even if it’s what you yourself prefer. Some people actually like the new and modern ambience of a box fresh train over an unrefurbished 80s carriage which is starting to look and feel very tatty from heavy usage since it’s 2015 refresh.the ride and environment of a journey on a MK4 set is far superior to that of a 197.
Not to everyone. You cannot rightfully claim to know what everyone prefers, even if it’s what you yourself prefer. Some people actually like the new and modern ambience of a box fresh train over an unrefurbished 80s carriage which is starting to look and feel very tatty from heavy usage since it’s 2015 refresh.
I might be in a minority, but I think I prefer the 197 for the full 4 hours + from Swansea to ManchesterQuite. I'd prefer a 197 for short trips (less than 1hr) as I feel that a loco-hauled carriage is best enjoyed for a longer journey.
Are you for real! you are in the minority if you think the environment of a 197 comes close to a MK4 set, not sure where you get the idea they are unrefubished they have been refurbished specifically the GC sets, I have heard comments from some passengers thinking they may be in first class when they see the standard class seats on the GC sets. The 197's may be new but they have had their fair share of issues, they do provide a good replacement from the 150's but the ride quality is well below what should be expected on new units, in my experience, especially when sitting over the bogeys, the buffeting and clanging was very noticeable and annoying.Not to everyone. You cannot rightfully claim to know what everyone prefers, even if it’s what you yourself prefer. Some people actually like the new and modern ambience of a box fresh train over an unrefurbished 80s carriage which is starting to look and feel very tatty from heavy usage since it’s 2015 refresh.
I share the frustration with the poor performance of the 67 fleet, however, ultimately TfW are to blame as they have chosen to appoint a subcontractor that has not performed adequately. I wonder what penalty clauses are in the contract between TfW and DB for the failure of a loco; I would hope that it covers the cost of providing alternative rolling stock provision and / or delay repay claimed.Not sure it is fair or accurate to blame TFW for the class 67 reliability issues, that remains the responsibility of DB only. A few posters are proposing that more 197's should be purchased to replace the MK4, if that were possible I think that would be a retrograde step as the ride and environment of a journey on a MK4 set is far superior to that of a 197. I can understand the frustration of passengers who have suffered cancellations or delays, I am one of those passengers, but my frustration is mostly directed at DB who should pull their finger out and get a program together and concentrate on improving the 67's appalling reliability issues especially the 67's adapted for use with the MK4 stock with TFW.
What other subcontractor of diesel locomotives was available at the time DB were given the contract?I share the frustration with the poor performance of the 67 fleet, however, ultimately TfW are to blame as they have chosen to appoint a subcontractor that has not performed adequately. I wonder what penalty clauses are in the contract between TfW and DB for the failure of a loco; I would hope that it covers the cost of providing alternative rolling stock provision and / or delay repay claimed.
At that point, though, new locos might as well be purchased. I'm not sure anyone can get the 67s in a decent state, and even if it is possible you'd be left with an extremely thirsty engine that struggles to accelerate.I agree it’s concerning, with DB selling up 67’s and seem to be pulling out of the UK market, I don’t think they’ve got much interest in ensuring TFW have locos when needed.
It would be nice to see TFW purchase the locos off DB and bring it in-house, although I appreciate that’s incredibly unlikely.