Jim said:
Where in this thread, did I say I was a SWT fan exactly?!?!
WTF?!?!
The SWT fleet is far bigger than FGW's (& possiabally FGWL's as well)
1 960
2 158's
22 159's
A few 170's
110 450's
45 444's
28 458's
tonnes of 455's
2 421's
24 442's
MORE desiro's on order.......
--- edited ---
FFS - I give up - I have shouted it, capsed it, but still YOU WON'T LISTEN. HE DID NOT use fancy words, & did not say it was a TCF, as my original post stated in error, which was stated in this thread....
Any of them due to me by chance?
You've implied through posts and other means of communications that you prefer Sh***y Wa**y Trains over FGW, and that you're a fan of the former over the latter.
As for the fleet differences, I'm not even going to bother counting how many power cars FGW own/lease, the amount of 180s (which contrary to previous statements I would prefer over a 159 any day) and the amount of HST trailer stock. As well as the Night Riveria MK2s and MK3s and the 57s.
As for you giving up, that's up to you. All I'm saying is that you expressed concern as a result of what the TM said, this being a shared reaction amongst the 'norms' judging by your post. If he said:
'Ladies and gentlemen, we apologise for the delays experienced this evening on this service. This is due to the signaller reporting a track circuit failure on the line ahead of us. As a result of this, we are progressing along the route at reduced speed until the driver can confirm with the signaller where the track circuit fault is so he can arrange other services to follow similar action on the affected line. This will add around 10 minutes to the journey time, but this is purely to ensure safety, and this is a routine procedure.'
Would that have made it better? No. Indeed, that's more likely to cause alarm in passengers. Whatever he DID say was probably a standard message to use in the meantime until he got confirmation from the control room, driver, signaller on what was happening. If this sort of thing had happened on an ATF service, I swear 99% of the time you'd not know what was happening. Basically my point remains that the TM did his job well enough. But if Mr. SWT Junior (that's you Jim) wants to find fault with everything FGW do, then go ahead and do so. I'm beyond the point of caring. If it was serious, you'd e-mail/write/fax a comments form off to FGW on it, but I daresay you'll get hardly anything, if anything at all, back. Although you might do, but FGW will claim it back from NR.
Oh, and the thing about me giving up my FGW fanship has NOTHING to do with you. There are many different reasons why I've done this, although I reserve the right to reattach my FGWFan name and fanship when I feel they, as a whole, have improved enough. Performance lately has been worse than most other TOCs, especially IC ones, but if this should improve soon, I might feel the name FGWFan worthy of donning on my username here. Oh yes, one last thing, thanks to TC for doing the name change.
--- edited ---
Jim said:
Correct, it ain't easy getting a whole new fleet going, perfectly, unlike FGW who have had the 180's for YONK'S
Sorry, got a new bit to go off on a tangent on...
How long has SWT had their 170s? A good few years, possibly longer than FGW have had their 180s. What are SWT (yes, even I'm sick of typing Sh***y Wa**y Trains, I didn't envisage typing it on average five times a post) doing with their 170s? Sending them off to FTPX. Why? To get more 158s in replacement. Sorry, but that's so stupid, it's going on my list right now! 10 Reasons to Hate SWT...Maybe that should be more, but that list will be compiled before the next forum meet. Or posted somewhere, whichever is sooner.
I'm not known to like Turbostars, but even I can't see why SWT want to unload some of their best fleet off in replacement for older, less reliable trains. Granted, FTPX will find them quite handy, what with their improved accleration on the Pennines, but still...
The 180s have been troublesome since Day 1, everyone knows that. But in the years they've been under FGW's wing, they've improved quite a lot, much like the 458s. Still seems strange both TOCs want to get rid of their newer fleets in terms of 180s and 458s when they've improved considerably.
In any case, that really is enough for me. I will say ONE good thing for SWT. What might that be? Use of 159s? No. 442s? Ha! No, it's the 458s. Best new-gen EMUs I've sampled, by far. The FC in them is lush too. Which reminds me to visit Reading and get on a 458 again as soon as possible.
Delivering yet another rant,
WSXFan