IET's grounded - what would you run?

[Failed Unit]

MML Mk3s simply come with too many issues to be used as substitute rolling stock on GWR.

I was thinking about on LNER. But then sending the LNER 800s to GWR also has ATP issues.

 

[JonathanH]

I was thinking about on LNER. But then sending the LNER 800s to GWR also has ATP issues.

Yes, I should have put 'anywhere' rather than GWR. LNER traincrew knowledge will have definitely lapsed. Isn't it mainly the LNER 800s that are out of service with 801s still working? So LNER 800s aren't available for GWR in any case.

 

[squizzler]

Perhaps the rail companies concerned can charter some aircraft to handle the long distance traffic to Devon, Cornwall and Scotland. I would imagine there is no shortage of planes and pilots with nothing else to do at present, nor airport slots.

Better than leaving the money on the table for the air operators.

 

[DJ_K666]

47s and mk2Fs

 

[JonathanH]

47s and mk2Fs

Clearly unacceptable for the same reasons put forward for MML HSTs. The days on slam door stock being acceptable to substitute are over, whatever the circumstances.

 

[Failed Unit]

It does seem more difficult these days because we are more efficient. The sprinter and pacer problems in the 1980s resulted in all sorts of junk coming out of sidings.

 

[Annetts key]

This would of course make sense HOWEVER the lack of ATP on the Hull sets would almost certainly make them not allowed to run over GWR metals , certainly over the ATP fitted bits (which is everything close to London Reading and Swindon and Bristol).

Is that in GWRs safety case? You may well be right through come to mention it! In which case get some of those lovely purple trains down here pronto!

The Great Western Main Line (GWML) ATP system is fitted between North Somerset Junction (just east of Bristol Temple Meads) to London Paddington. And between Bristol Parkway and Wootton Bassett Junction.

GWR publicly pledged after the Southall crash, that all their high speed services between Bristol and London would only run if they had operational ATP.

 

[BayPaul]

It does feel like GWR are doing a good job of getting as much in service as fast as possible, if the rumours of the 387s running to Swindon from tomorrow are true, then combined with the XC shuttle Swindon - Temple Meads and the very limited IET service from Reading - Newport (presumably will become Swindon - Swansea when there is 387 running to Swindon), plus Turbos taking over on the Cotswolds and Gloucester lines sounds quite sensible. Something I haven't seen suggested would be for the Castle Class to run an hourly Penzance - Newbury route, to connect with 387s to Paddington. It is around 4h40, so it should be achievable with 10 out of the 12 sets. As others have suggested, busstitute further branch lines and other service reductions (e.g. terminating Cardiff - Portsmouth at Southampton) to free up other units to take over Cardiff to Taunton.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 May 2021 ==

No... GWR are using 30/33 387s in the peaks, the maximum allowed, due to strengthening required for social distancing.

There are no surplus 387s on weekdays - you would have to rob Peter to use the cliche phrase.

Reducing HEx to half hourly would give 2 HEx 8 cars back, but they’d be useless for additional services beyond Didcot as the Swindon drivers who sign beyond Didcot; don’t sign the modified HEx 387s with their very different cab layouts and everything driven through the ETCS Screen. Also I can’t see HEx consenting to their use, although happy to be proven wrong...

Would it be possible to sandwich 4 car HEx sets between 2x GWR 387s, to allow the Paddington - Didcot, (and hopefully soon Paddington - Swindon) sets to go from 8 cars to 12, so keeping conventional cabs on the ends, and allowing them to be driven by GWR drivers, or are the HEx sets no longer compatible?

 

[Failed Unit]

I suspect in the short term they may have to think again about the ATP situation. I think the press would no react well if they have mass cancellations because of it. They rest of the network operates safely without it. But I guess even if they get Reading - Penzance going with something it will be a big help.

 

[cactustwirly]

It does feel like GWR are doing a good job of getting as much in service as fast as possible, if the rumours of the 387s running to Swindon from tomorrow are true, then combined with the XC shuttle Swindon - Temple Meads and the very limited IET service from Reading - Newport (presumably will become Swindon - Swansea when there is 387 running to Swindon), plus Turbos taking over on the Cotswolds and Gloucester lines sounds quite sensible. Something I haven't seen suggested would be for the Castle Class to run an hourly Penzance - Newbury route, to connect with 387s to Paddington. It is around 4h40, so it should be achievable with 10 out of the 12 sets. As others have suggested, busstitute further branch lines and other service reductions (e.g. terminating Cardiff - Portsmouth at Southampton) to free up other units to take over Cardiff to Taunton.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 May 2021 ==


Would it be possible to sandwich 4 car HEx sets between 2x GWR 387s, to allow the Paddington - Didcot, (and hopefully soon Paddington - Swindon) sets to go from 8 cars to 12, so keeping conventional cabs on the ends, and allowing them to be driven by GWR drivers, or are the HEx sets no longer compatible?

They just need more 387s, ideally it would be a half hourly service

 

[Bletchleyite]

They just need more 387s, ideally it would be a half hourly service

The HEx sets are "more 387s"

How are the cabs different?

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I suspect in the short term they may have to think again about the ATP situation. I think the press would no react well if they have mass cancellations because of it. They rest of the network operates safely without it. But I guess even if they get Reading - Penzance going with something it will be a big help.

And then what happens if there sadly an incident. ATP as a safety feature is unlikely to be negotiable.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 May 2021 ==

The HEx sets are "more 387s"

How are the cabs different?

They are set up for ECTS operation in a similar way to the Cambrian 158s

 

[43096]

They just need more 387s, ideally it would be a half hourly service

365s back in on Great Northern to release 387s to GWR seems an obvious one.

 

[Western Lord]

Has anyone mentioned the strategic steam reserve yet?

 

[Failed Unit]

And then what happens if there sadly an incident. ATP as a safety feature is unlikely to be negotiable.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 May 2021 ==



They are set up for ECTS operation in a similar way to the Cambrian 158s

I always struggle with this.

We can’t run a train without ATP because there is a 1 in 1000 chance of a fatality. (Compared with 1 in 1100 should the train have ATP)
alternative. Send everyone by road where we have a 1 in 100 chance of a fatality.

The figures are not real of course, but sometimes the lack of a pragmatic solution is frustrating. In order of safety we have.

1. train with ATP
2. train without ATP
3. Road.

if 1 isn’t available then the least safe option is preferable as no-one cares if people die on the roads.

 

[RobShipway]

Are Greater Anglia using all their Class 379 units?

If there is any spare Class 379 units, then maybe these could be used by Great Northern as well as using class 365 units. That way all Great Northern Class 387's could then be used by GWR , if they have enough staff trained on the class 387. Before any states the class 379 is a different train, the answer to that is that the Class 387 is a variation of the Class 379 Bombardier Electrostar, albeit with dual-voltage capability. I believe that the cab controls in the class 379 are exactly the same as in in the class 387. In fact I would go as far to say that GN, would be better replacing their class 387 units with using class 379 than they would be with using class 365, if they were to be temporarily moving over their class 387 units to GWR.

 

[Failed Unit]

I think GN could cope without the 387s (if all the 365s were available). Remember a lot of services are removed from timetable. The demand on rolling stock is much less.

 

[JonathanH]

Are Greater Anglia using all their Class 379 units?

Yes, they need them to run West Anglia services as 720s aren't in operation there yet.

I think GN could cope without the 387s (if all the 365s were available). Remember a lot of services are removed from timetable. The demand on rolling stock is much less.

365s can't go to Kings Lynn. GN still need the large majority of their 387s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

365s can't go to Kings Lynn.

What used to go there?

 

[JonathanH]

What used to go there?

Yes but they aren't allowed any more. It has already been mentioned, maybe not in this thread however. Moreover it is now nearly four years ago since they were the stock on that route.

The reported problem is that the DOO monitors have been decommissioned.

 

[Dren Ahmeti]

This would of course make sense HOWEVER the lack of ATP on the Hull sets would almost certainly make them not allowed to run over GWR metals , certainly over the ATP fitted bits (which is everything close to London Reading and Swindon and Bristol).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 May 2021 ==


Is that in GWRs safety case? You may well be right through come to mention it! In which case get some of those lovely purple trains down here pronto!

You can run non-ATP stock between Didcot-Paddington (or maybe Reading) at 110mph with TPWS+ grids.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

What used to go there?

365s require DOO Mirrors and Monitors, these have been removed north of Cambridge when they ceased operating that route.

Trains to King’s Lynn also now require SDO to be fitted to call at Watlington which 387s have and 365s don’t.

Also King’s Lynn drivers no longer sign 365s and some new drivers there will have never signed them.

 

[Annetts key]

Has anyone mentioned the strategic steam reserve yet?

Yes, but they need firemen, are you volunteering for the job?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 May 2021 ==

I always struggle with this.

We can’t run a train without ATP because there is a 1 in 1000 chance of a fatality. (Compared with 1 in 1100 should the train have ATP)
alternative. Send everyone by road where we have a 1 in 100 chance of a fatality.

The figures are not real of course, but sometimes the lack of a pragmatic solution is frustrating. In order of safety we have.

1. train with ATP
2. train without ATP
3. Road.

if 1 isn’t available then the least safe option is preferable as no-one cares if people die on the roads.

From https://www.railengineer.co.uk/chiltern-atp-obsolescence/

RSR1999, and therefore the law, requires infrastructure managers and train operators to permit only trains with train protection equipment fitted to operate. Train protection equipment is defined as a system which can stop a train if it passes a red signal, if it approaches a red signal at too high a speed, or if it is driven too fast.

These new regulations also said that, where it was reasonably practicable to fit ATP, then it had to be used. This meant that both the Chiltern and Great Western ATP systems were to remain in service alongside TPWS.

 

[Failed Unit]

Yes, but they need firemen, are you volunteering for the job?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 May 2021 ==

I am not disputing this. But I am more perplexed that the view is that it is better people die on the roads as road deaths do not matter. This is an unprecedented crisis. Sometimes we need pragmatic solution rather then force people onto the least safe alternative. I am driving to Cornwall. How many people die on the roads every day? I would prefer any train to driving but am denied that option as the law views no train is better then a less well protected train.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am not disputing this. But I am more perplexed that the view is that it is better people die on the roads as road deaths do not matter. This is an unprecedented crisis. Sometimes we need pragmatic solution rather then force people onto the least safe alternative. I am driving to Cornwall. How many people die on the roads every day? I would prefer any train to driving but am denied that option as the law views no train is better then a less well protected train.

It does rather seem the UK is incapable of taking a holistic, integrated view of passenger transport. The fight against integration in cities like Manchester is another symptom of it. It seems a losing battle - everyone cares about their own mode's fiefdom, not the greater good. It's really bad, but it seems culturally ingrained.

Interestingly, as an aside, the fear of flying post 9/11 caused loads of extra road deaths in the US.

 

[Annetts key]

As long as the appropriate requirements are met, a non-ATP fitted train can run on a ATP fitted line. However, as I said earlier, GWR made a very public pledge.
So the real question is, can a GWR operated service run at “high speed” without having operational ATP?
I don’t know the answer to that.
But if another TOC was to run the non-ATP fitted train, again as long as the appropriate requirements are met, that would be okay.

The real problem here is one of politics and money. We make life so complex for ourselves in order to promise different things to different people/areas and have different standards in different places in order to save money...

 

[SteelWeelApeal]

Yes, but they need firemen, are you volunteering for the job?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 May 2021 ==

I'd be willing to learn

 

[gingertom]

could Scotrail source a couple of 2+8 sets?

 

[JonathanH]

could Scotrail source a couple of 2+8 sets?

What backfills for Scotrail? Can GWR run sets without a TGS carriage?

 

[gingertom]

What backfills for Scotrail? Can GWR run sets without a TGS carriage?

was under the impression they weren't fully committed as yet so no backfilling needed.