Progress of delivery of cascaded/refurbished/PRM modified stock to TFW/Wales and Borders

[Brissle Girl]

The only people that will care to that degree of precision are those that probably already know the answer, and that, by a long way, is not TfW’s target audience.

 

[anamyd]

158s was built from 1989

Yes, but none of TfW's 158s were built in 1989, or 1992 for that matter!

 

[Sion John]

On the accessibility page it says that there are 22 153s in the fleet.

Ah right

 

[anamyd]

The only people that will care to that degree of precision are those that probably already know the answer, and that, by a long way, is not TfW’s target audience.

Why be incorrect when you can be correct, and why "not care" when you can "care"...?

The "target audience" isn't the whole "audience".

 

[sftfan1909]

It really is irrelevant to the purpose the information serves.

 

[Mrs. Fortescue]

Yes, but none of TfW's 158s were built in 1989, or 1992 for that matter!

No, but they were built in the time frame specified. Their statement is not incorrect.

Of all the things to cry about, honestly.

 

[anamyd]

It really is irrelevant to the purpose the information serves.

I suppose that there is the term "splitting hairs". I'm just baffled by the incorrect build years when the correct years are freely available.

 

[anamyd]

No, but they were built in the time frame specified. Their statement is not incorrect.

Of all the things to cry about, honestly.

That much is true at least, although the 2-car 170/2s were built in a more recent year than 2001.

I'm not crying, because it's not worth crying about as you say.

 

[PHILIPE]

The issue here is non-PRM com-pliancy of vehicles not when these and all and sundry vehicles were built. Nobody is concerned about that

 

[anamyd]

Also 13 TFW 153s, 5 GA ones, plus the rumoured ones from the West Midlands would give about 22

I guess that the WMT to TfW 153 transfers are rumours no more, although I'm not sure why TfW would include them in the number that are in their fleet, because as far as I'm aware they're not even able to leave WMT's fleet yet.

 

[anamyd]

The issue here is non-PRM com-pliancy of vehicles not when these and all and sundry vehicles were built. Nobody is concerned about that

The last time I checked, I was a "body" and I was concerned about that, but I get what you're saying and you make a fair point, even though the inclusion of those build years is part of some of the TOC accessibility web pages and booklets in the first place.

Re: non-PRM compliancy, I recently quoted text relating to that from both the Senedd Plenary 4/12/19 with a derogation update (which I don't think anyone thanked me for or responded to) and TfW's accessibility page that you made me aware of.

 

[anamyd]

i mean i seen it on TfW journey check too

Yeah, fair!

 

[krus_aragon]

they’re keeping the general public informed, far more than ATW did - I think that’s a positive.

Hear, hear!

 

[Brissle Girl]

(which I don't think anyone thanked me for or responded to

Unless it’s in response to a specific request, if everyone viewing a thread said thank you whenever a piece of information is posted, threads would become completely unmanageable, so I think it’s good practise not to keep thanking people. Indeed, constant thank you’s and similar very short posts which don’t add anything new to the subject are more suitable for conversations which should really be carried out using the separate facility within the forum.

Indeed, my perception is that a couple of these TfW related rolling stock topics have become rather too conversational in nature, in a way that many others don’t, and thus rather long and unmanageable in relation to the amount of new information.

 

[Caaardiff]

Some things on these forums really are taken too seriously. It's a public information page to summarise the PRM compliance, not a fact sheet for technical specifications and build dates. No-one really cares of the exact dates of when those specific units were built, especially the travelling public.

On the subject of Pacers, there will be no additional Pacers joining the fleet. From a reliable source Pacers will be allocated to Rhymney/Penarth and Cityline work. There will be the current 30 in the fleet but less than 20 will be planned to work each day.

153's will be moved to North and West Wales to work Wrexham-Bidston (pairs), Heart of Wales (Some single some pairs), Chester - Crewe (Pairs), Blaenau Branch (Single) & West Wales (Most single but some pairs) and the Cardiff Bay branch. I guess the 153's that are not going to be modified will be the ones paired up with another 153.

 

[PHILIPE]

Some things on these forums really are taken too seriously. It's a public information page to summarise the PRM compliance, not a fact sheet for technical specifications and build dates. No-one really cares of the exact dates of when those specific units were built, especially the travelling public.

On the subject of Pacers, there will be no additional Pacers joining the fleet. From a reliable source Pacers will be allocated to Rhymney/Penarth and Cityline work. There will be the current 30 in the fleet but less than 20 will be planned to work each day.

153's will be moved to North and West Wales to work Wrexham-Bidston (pairs), Heart of Wales (Some single some pairs), Chester - Crewe (Pairs), Blaenau Branch (Single) & West Wales (Most single but some pairs) and the Cardiff Bay branch. I guess the 153's that are not going to be modified will be the ones paired up with another 153.

Not sure of Bidston now as the Users Group claim they were told that 150s would stay. 153s are suspect regarding performance on the route going on past performance

Already mentioned here:-

https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-wales-and-borders.196081/page-2#post-4316796

 

[6Gtraincrew]

Bidstons will be 150's

 

[Sion John]

Some things on these forums really are taken too seriously. It's a public information page to summarise the PRM compliance, not a fact sheet for technical specifications and build dates. No-one really cares of the exact dates of when those specific units were built, especially the travelling public.

On the subject of Pacers, there will be no additional Pacers joining the fleet. From a reliable source Pacers will be allocated to Rhymney/Penarth and Cityline work. There will be the current 30 in the fleet but less than 20 will be planned to work each day.

153's will be moved to North and West Wales to work Wrexham-Bidston (pairs), Heart of Wales (Some single some pairs), Chester - Crewe (Pairs), Blaenau Branch (Single) & West Wales (Most single but some pairs) and the Cardiff Bay branch. I guess the 153's that are not going to be modified will be the ones paired up with another 153.

I rarely see a 153 on the how line its mostly a 150 now

 

[anamyd]

Unless it’s in response to a specific request, if everyone viewing a thread said thank you whenever a piece of information is posted, threads would become completely unmanageable, so I think it’s good practise not to keep thanking people. Indeed, constant thank you’s and similar very short posts which don’t add anything new to the subject are more suitable for conversations which should really be carried out using the separate facility within the forum.

Indeed, my perception is that a couple of these TfW related rolling stock topics have become rather too conversational in nature, in a way that many others don’t, and thus rather long and unmanageable in relation to the amount of new information.

Apologies to you and anyone else affected and I'll bear that in mind.

 

[anamyd]

Some things on these forums really are taken too seriously. It's a public information page to summarise the PRM compliance, not a fact sheet for technical specifications and build dates. No-one really cares of the exact dates of when those specific units were built, especially the travelling public.

On the subject of Pacers, there will be no additional Pacers joining the fleet. From a reliable source Pacers will be allocated to Rhymney/Penarth and Cityline work. There will be the current 30 in the fleet but less than 20 will be planned to work each day.

153's will be moved to North and West Wales to work Wrexham-Bidston (pairs), Heart of Wales (Some single some pairs), Chester - Crewe (Pairs), Blaenau Branch (Single) & West Wales (Most single but some pairs) and the Cardiff Bay branch. I guess the 153's that are not going to be modified will be the ones paired up with another 153.

Point taken. I still think that the dates should be correct since they're included in the first place, but yeah

Only 20 out of 30 Pacers in use sounds interesting! The other 10 would be available to be worked on, and the 3 extra 142s from Northern would be parts donors, yes...?

 

[Brissle Girl]

I would certainly expect there to be no problem with stock availability on the Rhymney and City Lines then, and if a unit does sit down can be swapped out relatively quickly. I suspect things might be a lot tighter on the other valley branches though, as they certainly won’t have the luxury of so much spare stock.

 

[Cambrian359]

Unless it’s in response to a specific request, if everyone viewing a thread said thank you whenever a piece of information is posted, threads would become completely unmanageable, so I think it’s good practise not to keep thanking people. Indeed, constant thank you’s and similar very short posts which don’t add anything new to the subject are more suitable for conversations which should really be carried out using the separate facility within the forum.

Indeed, my perception is that a couple of these TfW related rolling stock topics have become rather too conversational in nature, in a way that many others don’t, and thus rather long and unmanageable in relation to the amount of new information.

I have to agree, the way the last 2 pages have gone today we’re going to end up with yet another TFW stock thread being locked because it’s turned into a conversation and lots of irrelevant and pointless posts that add nothing to the subject at hand.can we keep things on point and relevant with minimal unnecessary posts. As much as I may moan when the mods lock topics I can see why they’ve done it to various TFW threads as they all end up like this one.

 

[tomos dafis]

The last time I checked, I was a "body" and I was concerned about that, but I get what you're saying and you make a fair point, even though the inclusion of those build years is part of some of the TOC accessibility web pages and booklets in the first place.

Re: non-PRM compliancy, I recently quoted text relating to that from both the Senedd Plenary 4/12/19 with a derogation update (which I don't think anyone thanked me for or responded to) and TfW's accessibility page that you made me aware of.

Unless it’s in response to a specific request, if everyone viewing a thread said thank you whenever a piece of information is posted, threads would become completely unmanageable, so I think it’s good practise not to keep thanking people. Indeed, constant thank you’s and similar very short posts which don’t add anything new to the subject are more suitable for conversations which should really be carried out using the separate facility within the forum.

Indeed, my perception is that a couple of these TfW related rolling stock topics have become rather too conversational in nature, in a way that many others don’t, and thus rather long and unmanageable in relation to the amount of new information.

I have to agree, the way the last 2 pages have gone today we’re going to end up with yet another TFW stock thread being locked because it’s turned into a conversation and lots of irrelevant and pointless posts that add nothing to the subject at hand.can we keep things on point and relevant with minimal unnecessary posts. As much as I may moan when the mods lock topics I can see why they’ve done it to various TFW threads as they all end up like this one.

I did watch the cllip of Ken Skates in the Senedd using anamyd's link. The most notable things were references to delays in delivery of cascaded stock, the short time frame for completing PRM and a complaint by him that DfT would not confirm derogations until after the election when Welsh Government had completed fully all required documents requested.
Delivery of the rest of of the PRM modified 150 units will be complete by summer 2020 with all 13 of the 153s to receive PRM work out of a total 18 (or 22) also delivered on the same timescale. Pacers should start leaving from Spring 2020 when 769 and 230 units enter service (we'll see). Meanwhile there are 4 more 170's to arrive in the immediate future. This thread is the place for news and observations on this over the coming weeks and months.
That links to a final point rellating to the other 2 quotes above. They are in spot on agreement with a message I got from a moderator when I began this thread. It was made clear if posts stray off topic or descend into personal and sometimes trivial "conversations" among just a few individuals then the thread could be locked - I suspect that is what happened with the TFW stock shortages thread. We need to be aware that the moderators are quite strict about these things so let's be careful not to lose this thread - please direct any queries or comments about moderation to the moderators rather than commenting about it on here

 

[SWML9102]

Point taken. I still think that the dates should be correct since they're included in the first place, but yeah

Only 20 out of 30 Pacers in use sounds interesting! The other 10 would be available to be worked on, and the 3 extra 142s from Northern would be parts donors, yes...?

Platforms on the Rhymney route were extended for 6-car use years ago. Certain morning and evening peak services could justify a 6-car pacer.

 

[anamyd]

Platforms on the Rhymney route were extended for 6-car use years ago. Certain morning and evening peak services could justify a 6-car pacer.

Will be interesting to see if it happens!

 

[Paul Dancey]

Will be interesting to see if it happens!

While I was waiting for the 10.33pm Penarth train last night (which was late as usual), I'm sure I saw a 6 car pacer arrive at Central on route for Rhymney. But the last two cars appeared to be locked out.

 

[anamyd]

While I was waiting for the 10.33pm Penarth train last night (which was late as usual), I'm sure I saw a 6 car pacer arrive at Central on route for Rhymney. But the last two cars appeared to be locked out.

I wonder whether there would actually be sufficient crew to run entirely passenger triple Pacer sets...? I believe that three guards would be required (one for each unit) unless I'm getting that all wrong...?

 

[anthony263]

Treherbert services can also be worked by 6 carriage trains

 

[sftfan1909]

I wonder whether there would actually be sufficient crew to run entirely passenger triple Pacer sets...? I believe that three guards would be required (one for each unit) unless I'm getting that all wrong...?

No, it's one guard per train

 

[krus_aragon]

I wonder whether there would actually be sufficient crew to run entirely passenger triple Pacer sets...? I believe that three guards would be required (one for each unit) unless I'm getting that all wrong...?

Some operators (Northern?) require a member of staff in each non-gangway unit at all times, but that could be a driver in the front unit. I don't believe TfW have any such rules.