• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Splitting GWR franchise - not very sensible?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
31 Jul 2010
Messages
360
I’d like to see North Downs Line going over to Southern and operated by 171 but I know that’s never going to happen.

Ideally if South West took it on they could consolidate it all from their Guildford depot which would make sense as I heard TSGN don’t want to cover the driving turns much longer anyway
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,808
I’d like to see North Downs Line going over to Southern and operated by 171 but I know that’s never going to happen.

Ideally if South West took it on they could consolidate it all from their Guildford depot which would make sense as I heard TSGN don’t want to cover the driving turns much longer anyway

Even if Southern operated the North Downs Line it wouldn't and couldn't be operated with 171s as they are all accounted for running to Uckfield and on the Marsh and they stopped building Turbostars over 10 years ago.

Guildford stabling sidings (and the station platforms for that matter) (and definitely not a 'depot') look pretty full overnight with the rolling stock needed to run suburban services which start there in the morning and the Guildford to Ascot line. Even if you mean that drivers and guards should be based at Guildford would it really make sense to have crew changes in the middle of the route?

The first train from Reading to Gatwick leaves at 0430ish and forms a connection out of GWR's Night Riviera sleeper train. The last train from Gatwick to Reading (sort of) arrives at Reading in time for the same connection. Should these first and last trains be cut? Granted a Guildford start might allow an earlier connection from there to the west for start of service from Reading, but it has never been obvious to me that the service could be in better hands than with GWR mainly run from Reading as a complementary route to its western network.
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,231
Of course I have I work the route and travel incredibly frequently . Other than first thing in morning and last train at night the trains are at least busy enough to make a 5 car feel overcrowded in the winter. People do live in Devon and Cornwall you know it's not just summer tourists!

Luckily TOCs don't plan intercity services expecting to have most seats sat on , I believe on long distance the desirable aim is about 60 percent seat occupancy. This also allows extra room for the large amount of luggage carried on this route.
A five car IET has just 2 bike spaces, an instant no no on the Plymouth route and minimal wheelchair space too. GwR are not planning on running 5 car sets on most pad plyms anyway, my argument is against the pairs of 5s that will be happening when I believe 9 car sets would make more sense.

How do you know that a five-car will "feel overcrowded" in the winter when one has yet to turn a wheel in passenger service west of Plymouth? If we go by your 60 per cent seat occupancy figure, then fewer than 200 of the 326 seats in a five-car GWR IET would have someone sat in them - which isn't my idea of an overcrowded train.

Yes, people do live in Cornwall, which is why the timetable from January will, when you add together the beefed-up GWR regional service, the two-hourly London-Penzance services and XC's morning and evening runs, effectively provide two trains per hour both ways along the main line in Cornwall. Including short HSTs offering 310 or so seats per set, so not far shy of a five-car IET and more than twice a Class 150's capacity - or are you going to start condemning those HSTs as being far too small for Cornwall's needs as well?

What has a five-car set got to do with anything when it comes to the London-Plymouth leg? It is has been stated often enough by GWR that all services will be 9-car or 2x5 between those points, which makes sense.

But running 650-seat fixed-formation trains into Cornwall all day, every day of the year, on top of all the extra capacity that the HSTs will deliver anyway, would not make sense. What is so hard to grasp about that?

At the times of the year when more high-capacity formations are actually needed in Cornwall, the timetable will allow for that, just the same as it does now with extra HSTs on summer Saturdays, bank holiday weekends, etc. Including HSTs 'robbed' from the likes of the Cotswold Line on summer Friday afternoons, with Turbos being used in their place. Always a barrel of laughs on an actually overcrowded 166 with failed air conditioning....
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,326
How do you know that a five-car will "feel overcrowded" in the winter when one has yet to turn a wheel in passenger service west of Plymouth? If we go by your 60 per cent seat occupancy figure, then fewer than 200 of the 326 seats in a five-car GWR IET would have someone sat in them - which isn't my idea of an overcrowded train.


Yes, people do live in Cornwall, which is why the timetable from January will, when you add together the beefed-up GWR regional service, the two-hourly London-Penzance services and XC's morning and evening runs, effectively provide two trains per hour both ways along the main line in Cornwall. Including short HSTs offering 310 or so seats per set, so not far shy of a five-car IET and more than twice a Class 150's capacity - or are you going to start condemning those HSTs as being far too small for Cornwall's needs as well?


What has a five-car set got to do with anything when it comes to the London-Plymouth leg? It is has been stated often enough by GWR that all services will be 9-car or 2x5 between those points, which makes sense.


But running 650-seat fixed-formation trains into Cornwall all day, every day of the year, on top of all the extra capacity that the HSTs will deliver anyway, would not make sense. What is so hard to grasp about that?


At the times of the year when more high-capacity formations are actually needed in Cornwall, the timetable will allow for that, just the same as it does now with extra HSTs on summer Saturdays, bank holiday weekends, etc. Including HSTs 'robbed' from the likes of the Cotswold Line on summer Friday afternoons, with Turbos being used in their place. Always a barrel of laughs on an actually overcrowded 166 with failed air conditioning....

Quite, and actually with the 5 coach units is easier to shuffle then around to provide capacity where it's needed to allow somewhere like Cornwall to have 9/10 coach services when it's needed.

It maybe that during some periods that is 10 coaches to Truro and then 5 after (as that saves one unit), or provides a service to Falmouth Other times it could be that is 5 coaches to Par and then the train splits to serve both Penzance and St Ives.

Even running all the 80x's in pairs there's more of them to replace all the HST's, and although (due to wiring not reaching as far as soon as planned) they are going to be stretched further than they should have been there's still plenty of them.

There's always been an element of "we don't like Voyagers, the 80x's are a lot of 5 coach trains like then and so this is going to bad". However there's a lot of differences:

- Voyagers where replacing the same number of seats over more services, 80x's are replacing more seats over the same number of services

- Voyagers with XC are mostly (about 65% of the fleet) 4 coach units, 80x's are a minimum of 5 coaches, with write a few 9 coach units.

- Voyagers have 200/250 seats, 80x's have 320(ish) seats, meaning not all 5 coach trains are equal.

- Voyagers are a fairly small production run, as the whole 22x fleet is formed of something like 500 coaches, there's something like 600 coaches just with GWR, plus those on the East Coast Franchise as well as the other First franchises, with plenty of scope for additional units to be ordered by the likes of GWR in their next franchise (which is due to start at about the time that the last orders of 80x's are fulfilled).

I could probably go on, but it's fairy clear that the industry is not repeating the mistakes of the Voyagers with the 80x's, and so the 80x's are likely to provide the flexibility that the HST's couldn't (despite dire warnings of trains being so full in Cornwall that people will be left behind) whilst providing full length services with more seats that the HST's on nearly every service that the HST's currently run (other than some services which don't require that level of service).

Bringing it back on subject, by splitting the franchise there would be less scope to nick 80x's from (say) Cardiff services to run longer trains in Cornwall in the summer when there is demand for full length trains.
 

irish_rail

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2013
Messages
3,878
Location
Plymouth
I have no issue with fewer carriages in Cornwall on London bound trains my issue is with the make up of the train from Plymouth to London. We are already seeing 5 car sets locked out of use when there are insufficent staff to crew both sets and my argument is against pairs of 5s instead of 9s. When you look at the extra crew costs involved I'm not convinced that the savings are there of portion running. And I would argue why portion running isn't proposed Cardiff to Swansea where the services really are dead, but then I doubt that would be politically palatable to the Welsh assembly. The south west on the other hand is not the best at making a fuss and generally just gets what its given.
 

pt_mad

Established Member
Joined
26 Sep 2011
Messages
2,960
What is the rule about staffing a double set? Do they need a train manager in each?
 

wils180

Member
Joined
19 Sep 2016
Messages
73
What is the rule about staffing a double set? Do they need a train manager in each?

atm they need a TM in the rear and a ticket examiner in the front, which is very much a temporary thing. long term union wants a TM in both which will never happen, company wants a TM in rear and a jumped up customer host in the front who will know how to call the driver and reset PAUs
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,231
And when nine-car sets start to enter service, there will probably be a whole lot less fuss about this anyway.

You don't seem to think much of customer hosts, for some reason.

A number of my acquaintance have subsequently 'jumped up' to become train managers...

I see no reason why an appropriately-trained customer host should be any less capable of performing certain duties than an assistant ticket examiner.
 

PHILIPE

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Nov 2011
Messages
13,472
Location
Caerphilly
Trains are running fairly frequently with only 5 out of 10 carriages available to passengers for this reason.
 

wils180

Member
Joined
19 Sep 2016
Messages
73
And when nine-car sets start to enter service, there will probably be a whole lot less fuss about this anyway.

You don't seem to think much of customer hosts, for some reason.

A number of my acquaintance have subsequently 'jumped up' to become train managers...

I see no reason why an appropriately-trained customer host should be any less capable of performing certain duties than an assistant ticket examiner.

i think very highly of customer hosts, there have been a number of times they have been invaluable in dealing with certain incidents.
I just think if the company wants to go down that route, they should give them better and more useful training; I would say the same thing about the ticket examiners, if that wasn’t just a temporary solution.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,437
Meanwhile elsewhere on GWR DOO trains run with no staff at all in one set.

The inconsistency and the reasons for it are mildly entertaining.

Do XC double Voyager sets ever have similar issues? How exactly are they manned, and why can’t GWR do exactly the same?
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,134
And when nine-car sets start to enter service, there will probably be a whole lot less fuss about this anyway.

You don't seem to think much of customer hosts, for some reason.

A number of my acquaintance have subsequently 'jumped up' to become train managers...

I see no reason why an appropriately-trained customer host should be any less capable of performing certain duties than an assistant ticket examiner.
True but FGW/ GWR had ample opportunity to face the challenges of negotiating longer term solutions to these and other staffing issues during their own DOO dispute, but ultimately chose just to kick the can down the road.
 
Last edited:

virgintrain1

Member
Joined
29 Jul 2011
Messages
209
Do XC double Voyager sets ever have similar issues? How exactly are they manned, and why can’t GWR do exactly the same?
XC try and roster TM in both sets however a caterer is classed as competent to work front or rear set (although they prefer them in the front) we regular run with just one TM. Caterers are trained in train communication and resetting call for aids . Although XC don't have anywhere near as many double sets as GWR.
 
Last edited:

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,231
True but FGW/ GWR had ample opportunity to face the challenges of negotiating longer term solutions to these and other staffing issues during their own DOO dispute, but ultimately chose just to kick the can down the road.

A decision which, I'm sure, had nothing to do with what appears to be an inflexible position on the part of the RMT when it comes to discussing anything to do with changes to DOO agreements or related matters...
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
4,923
It is has been stated often enough by GWR that all services will be 9-car or 2x5 between those points, which makes sense.

Didn't they also say all peak Bristol / South Wales - London services would be 9 car or 2x5 car too? How is that happening at the moment?
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,231
As noted above, with a train manger in one set and a ticket examiner (or another train manager) in the other.

All long-distance GWR IET services are being worked by 2x5 formations at the moment (unless one of the sets has failed or they are short of an ATE or TM to ride in the second set, which is then locked out of use) but the first nine-car sets should enter service soon.
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
4,923
As noted above, with a train manger in one set and a ticket examiner (or another train manager) in the other.

All long-distance GWR IET services are being worked by 2x5 formations at the moment (unless one of the sets has failed or they are short of an ATE or TM to ride in the second set, which is then locked out of use) but the first nine-car sets should enter service soon.

My point was they are not, and 5 car units (be it actually running as 5 car units, or running as 2x5 car with the rear set locked out) are pretty common at the moment. Despite GWR saying that would not happen. So why should anyone trust them when saying the same about the South West services? Hopefully it will get better when the 9 car units enter service, but I will wait to actually see it improve before I believe it.
 
Last edited:

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,326
My point was they are not, and 5 car units (be it actually running as 5 car units, or running as 2x5 car with the rear set locked out) are pretty common at the moment. Despite GWR saying that would not happen. So why should anyone trust them when saying the same about the South West services? Hopefully it will get better when the 9 car units enter service, but I will wait to actually see it improve before I believe it.

Presumably party of the issue at present is not being able to run any 9 coach units, which means you need more staff at a time that no all the staff have been trained.

I would guess that once 9 coach units start running there'll be less only 5 coach units running, partly due to needing less staff for those units and partly because more staff will have been trained.
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,231
My point was they are not, and 5 car units (be it actually running as 5 car units, or running as 2x5 car with the rear set locked out) are pretty common at the moment. Despite GWR saying that would not happen. So why should anyone trust them when saying the same about the South West services? Hopefully it will get better when the 9 car units enter service, but I will wait to actually see it improve before I believe it.

If you were making a point, why did you ask a question?

GWR's stated policy is clear, but as the saying goes, stuff happens - it always has, it always will. Until IET started to appear, if an HST broke down and there was no spare available, or one could not be stepped up/pinched from some other service, then there would be no train at all.

The aim is always to operate 2x5 if booked, and will be to operate a nine-car if booked when those are available - but since when has there ever been a cast-iron 100 per cent guarantee that this will happen every day of every year like clockwork? I've lost count of the number of times a Turbo has turned up on journeys I have made over the past 20 years or so instead of booked HSTs or 180s, but such is life.

People claim lone five-car sets to Bristol or South Wales or 2x5s with a locked-out set are 'common', but I have yet to encounter such a service myself and suspect it is more that as soon as one appears on GWR journeycheck they get pounced on in forums as yet more evidence of GWR's failings. Has anyone actually worked out how many times it is happening in the context of the overall number of services operating?

The problems caused by the loss of several months of the planned training period for IET operations last year have been mentioned rather a lot in various threads by now - the knock-on effects of that are still being felt at the moment. There isn't a limitless supply of train managers and assistant ticket examiners out there - and they have to have had the training on IETs in order to work them with passengers on board.
 

pt_mad

Established Member
Joined
26 Sep 2011
Messages
2,960
What is there to ensure that they don't run a double 5 car set with both sets in use and no member of staff in the front set?

I understand there must be some agreement in place. But what actually ensures it's fully adhered to?
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,326
What is there to ensure that they don't run a double 5 car set with both sets in use and no member of staff in the front set?

I understand there must be some agreement in place. But what actually ensures it's fully adhered to?

My guess would be that the driver and/or second member of staff wouldn't do their tasks and so it runs as agreed or it doesn't run.

IF you had non union staff they may allow it, but they probably wouldn't (given that they would be the ones in trouble if something went wrong as they weren't following the rules) and there's probably very few, if any, who aren't union members anyway (especially both driver and second crew combined).

Personally, would you do something which you knew was wrong? I certainly wouldn't unless there was a very good reason to do so, and even then it would have to be something like it would mean that it saved someone's life and even then I'd be very careful.
 

higthomas

Member
Joined
27 Nov 2012
Messages
1,131
What is there to ensure that they don't run a double 5 car set with both sets in use and no member of staff in the front set?
The fact that trains need a driver? :lol:
I understand there must be some agreement in place. But what actually ensures it's fully adhered to?
I imagine RMT would give them and awful lot of grief if they did that. And that might include the driver and TM.
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
4,923
Once again 5 car units being used on peak services this morning - both the 6.50am and 7.12am BTH - PAD from reports.
I understand the reasons, but many of us warned this would happen and were point blank told that we were worrying about nothing and it wouldn't.
 

irish_rail

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2013
Messages
3,878
Location
Plymouth
Once again 5 car units being used on peak services this morning - both the 6.50am and 7.12am BTH - PAD from reports.
I understand the reasons, but many of us warned this would happen and were point blank told that we were worrying about nothing and it wouldn't.
Anyone would think lessons had been learned from the Virgin voyager farce sadly not it seems. What gwr needed was a far higher percentage of 9 car sets with a handful of 5s, much the same as east coast is getting. No use moaning now as I doubt the extra money to extend them will ever be forthcoming and we are stuck with them for next three decades :(
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,326
Once again 5 car units being used on peak services this morning - both the 6.50am and 7.12am BTH - PAD from reports.
I understand the reasons, but many of us warned this would happen and were point blank told that we were worrying about nothing and it wouldn't.

In the class 800 thread the concern mostly raised was that 5 coach units would be timetabled to run rather than longer units.

Once the training and units are complete, then the level of disruption will be less.

If it had been a HST and it or the crew had problems there would be zero coaches, as it's a five rather than 10.

However this is much more suited to this thread:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/the-decline-of-gwr.163329/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top