Network turbos

Status
Not open for further replies.

evil_hippo

Member
Joined
9 Jun 2005
Messages
772
Location
Lewisham
I am surprised at the timetable for class 165s. It seems very ambitious for units with a 35 horse power engine under each carriage. Although perhaps not quite so bad for units with a total wight of just 37 tonnes.



(This is taken directly from the website; you'll find it in travelling with us>regional trains)
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Gareth Hale

Member
Joined
11 Jun 2005
Messages
941
evil_hippo said:
I am surprised at the timetable for class 165s. It seems very ambitious for units with a 35 horse power engine under each carriage. Although perhaps not quite so bad for units with a total wight of just 37 tonnes.



(This is taken directly from the website; you'll find it in travelling with us>regional trains)


I see an error, 35BHP per engine?!?!
--- edited ---
http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Images/Custom/143web.jpg

That doesnt really look like a pacer....
--- edited ---
Andrew said:
Yes, they've been derated for a couple of weeks now running up to GrW. First Great Western don't want to overdo their punctuality record in the first four week performance period. That way, when the new timetable is introduced, they can make a song and dance about improvement since the start of franchise - even if punctuality is as it stands currently aka seriously abysmal, atrocious, very poor, etc etc - 67%ish last time I checked, coming in well below most, if not all, other TOCs. Really crap. Incidentally these derated units will form the new trailer coaches for the high capacity HST sets - at which time the engines will be removed entirely - they'll pack them inside the 43s instead of the MTUs which would cost far to much if First are paying £millions to the govt.

Note: This is general sarcasm rather than an april fool.

On another note FGW claim to have one coach 143s - see the "our trains" main page - http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/Content.aspx?id=55


1 Coach, this is messed up a bit :confused:
 

ikar

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2005
Messages
514
Location
Europe (Rijeka, Croatia)
Andrew said:
First Great Western don't want to overdo their punctuality record in the first four week performance period. That way, when the new timetable is introduced, they can make a song and dance about improvement since the start of franchise - even if punctuality is as it stands currently aka seriously abysmal, atrocious, very poor, etc etc - 67%ish last time I checked, coming in well below most, if not all, other TOCs.

FGW ain't guilty for all delays. In the old days Western region had the worst performance. First invests a lot of money in their franchises, because the DfT doesn't let them to improve them. MTU re-engening proposed 4 years ago, what happened? Only 2 p/cars with MTU engines; They can't dump 143's. etc. The DfT runs the railway, they treat franchises like managing contracts. So FGW has unreliable old trains with no updrades being made (Thanks to DfT), so expect delays when a train failes (If this continues, It'll happen soon).
 

hexflyer

Member
Joined
6 Sep 2005
Messages
19
Location
slough, also in the cab between LHR an PAD
as a driver on the GWML (albeit the 1st 10 miles and the busiest!!) most of the delays are down to network rail with TCF's and points failures, the 165/166's are a****st the most reliable DMU around, the 180's are gettin better (now that the stupid coupling cover has been removed!!) and most of the HST failures are down to TPWS/ATP or coaching stock failures.
 

Sprog

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2005
Messages
1,315
Location
SPM
*refuses to comment on thread*

however....that 165/166 drawing looks very famlliar :mad:

hmmmmmm
 

Dennis

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
2,676
Location
Trowbridge
1 coach class 143 = Leyland National bus. They are obviously thinking about rail replacement services (on the Severn Beach line?). ;)

On a more serious note, as a generalisation, it is easy to criticise TOCS but lets think for a minute about what they are actually trying to do...

run train services to a timetable largely specified by ORR / DfT.
run these services on infrastructure they have little control over.
share the infrastructure with other users.
use hired-in trains supplied by ROSCO's (which can be old or unreliable and yet still be very expensive).


The TOCS seem to have little real direct influence over any of the factors governing performance. TOCS should be managing their suppliers to ensure the timetable is robust (perhaps not to these extreme seen with VXC!), ensuring reliable infrastructure of a quality suitable to run the timetable and working with the rolling stock suppliers to obtain the highest quality fleet.

Problems seen at GWT and other TOC's are largely a result of failing to manage the supplier-customer interfaces (of which in the privatised railway there are many). Senior management are accountable at the end of the day and if not capable of managing the operation correctly should not be rewarded for failure.

Fortunately, powers remain to remove poorly performing TOC's from franchises (through early termination or 'sacking') where appropriate.

Effective regulation is also essential - the previous regulator (single handed Tom Winsor) seemed to put in a lot of effort to secure high levels of funding for NR both from TOC's and direct from (then) SRA. The current regulatory team do not seem to be working with quite the same zeal to ensure NR continues to improve.
 

16CSVT2700

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2005
Messages
1,835
Location
Gdansk
spm_43030 said:
*refuses to comment on thread*

however....that 165/166 drawing looks very famlliar :mad:

hmmmmmm

Not mine!

Mine is far more accurate :)
 

Andrew

Member
Joined
7 Jun 2005
Messages
175
Just to be clear, I fully understand that there are many, many problems with the privatised railway - I'm all for renationalising. But when you hear whatever in the news it's "First Great Western punctuality..." and "First Great Western are reducing the service ..." - it's just the way the media report it - I guess because they have their brand over the trains, they run they services, and they used to be more accountable for their delays (well, maybe). Full thumbs up to First for defying the SRA specs where they could make a profit (ie Slough ML stops). And full thumbs down to the DfT for being as lousy as the SRA.
 

Coxster

Established Member
Joined
9 Jun 2005
Messages
9,244
On the 150, I very much doubt the driver's door will be painted into that sickly colour or the poeple that the doors are painted to help will try to get into the cab! The 158 looks very strange indeed and I won't even go into what I think of the Class 153 drawing!
 

LucaZone

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2006
Messages
752
Location
West End, Surrey
How come the only unit not to have any new livery concepts for it is the 165/166 fleet? They already have the designs, so I wonder why they havent used them.
 

Andrew

Member
Joined
7 Jun 2005
Messages
175
There isn't a new livery concept for the 180 fleet. That's a unit, unless I'm much mistaken. Basically they've only made new concepts for the fleet they're taking over. They've just used their old drawings from Reach for ex-FGW/FGWL stock - which are therefore in the current PP livery.
 

ChrisM

Member
Joined
14 Aug 2005
Messages
716
Personally i think the livery on the DMU fleet would be just about bearable if the doors were yellow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top