DarloRich
Veteran Member
Even made the radio 2 national travel news this morning...
good. about time LNWR & vivarail felt some heat. ( Also that suggests that the rest of the world of travel is moving well this Friday morning!)
Even made the radio 2 national travel news this morning...
Vivarail have said that there are some known issues with the cooling systems - has anything else being said officially about the causes of the unreliability?
I got into a Twitter conversation with Vivarail yesterday in which they specifically said that the engines themselves were not the issue, rather (implicitly) the design/layout of the raft itself.
They said that there is a shortage of gensets.
PS on the back cover of the leaflet is a route map. LNWR have spelled the name of one of their stations, Ridgmont, wrongly. That should tell you all you need to know about how much consideration they give about our line.
If a subcontractor is struggling unexpectedly, naming them in PR as you suggest could provoke their investors onto losing confidence and withdrawing,collapsing the company and making matters worse. If Viva rail is willing to carry the blame in hope of taking the credit later, let them.
To be fair, I'm yet to see any evidence that the new operator gives, er, a pile of faeces, for any part of its operation.
My willingness to be fair to LNWR has been exhausted. Last night was the final straw.
Mine went ages ago. They implemented a mainline timetable that was never going to work, and are not doing anything visible about that either. OK, they can't do much about changing it for a while, but they certainly could get their recruiting hats on and step up the crew diagrams, which are the main issue with it (the units are almost always in the right place, but they waste time being sat waiting for over-tight crew diagrams to catch up). Or they could recognise it won't work and put an emergency timetable in place with reduced frequencies and longer trains.
As for the MV, I think the only sensible thing now is to put buses on permanently as at least you can plan for it - alongside a plan to fix or replace the 230s - or both.
It is so bad that I am off to look at cars this weekend. I may as well drive now because i am spending so much on cabs. I never thought I would be saying that.
On the basis that it'll improve at some point I'd go for a pushbike, the Southern service from Bletchley to MKC (if the timing works for you) is now pretty reliable, and Bletchley has undercover cycle storage with cameras all over it.
Not even a cupboard for a Dahon clone?Ordinary walking waterproofs ttend to be OK on such upright bikes too ands are also great for waiting on platforms. Like the Dutch say, there is no bad weather, only wrong clothing.the problem is storage at home. I don't really have any suitable for a bike! I don't mind walking down to Blethcley in the nice weather but it is going to get tiresome really quickly once the weather breaks.
Not even a cupboard for a Dahon clone?Ordinary walking waterproofs ttend to be OK on such upright bikes too ands are also great for waiting on platforms. Like the Dutch say, there is no bad weather, only wrong clothing.
I've lived in similar. Carried the bike through. Worse was when I lived in flat with only stairs up. Still worth it to have a way to avoid rubbish buses there.I live in a small victorian terrace. Door opens from street into narrow hall. There is no rear access
The 153 previously used is still with LNR isn’t it? With the additional 172s now arrived ought to be time to get a couple down to Bletchley (the Coventry-Nuneaton is no longer 153 either). They aren’t PRM modified I don’t believe so have to go in December anyway, so transferring now would give Viva some breathing space and crews should still be competent.There must surely be some Pacers or 153s available soon.
The 153 previously used is still with LNR isn’t it? With the additional 172s now arrived ought to be time to get a couple down to Bletchley (the Coventry-Nuneaton is no longer 153 either). They aren’t PRM modified I don’t believe so have to go in December anyway, so transferring now would give Viva some breathing space and crews should still be competent.
The 153 previously used is still with LNR isn’t it? With the additional 172s now arrived ought to be time to get a couple down to Bletchley (the Coventry-Nuneaton is no longer 153 either). They aren’t PRM modified I don’t believe so have to go in December anyway, so transferring now would give Viva some breathing space and crews should still be competent.
Even one would help. Keep it in platform 6 ready and operate the service from 5. If the 230 conks out, quick platform alteration and off you go near to on time.
According to Three Counties, there is no serviceable unit at all at the moment so the whole thing is off.
LNWR (and LM before them) wont use P5 all day because they are paranoid about blocking south facing access to the carriage sidings/reducing operational flexibility
Presently almost all the layover is at the Bletchley end. How feasible would it be to change the timetable so most of it was at the Bedford end instead (in the dedicated bay) so the platform could be occupied for only about 5 minutes for a quick turnaround?
i have tried asking that - i suspect there may be similar issues with access to Caldwell sidings and the depot area at Bedford
Just putting a lift in on P6 at Beltchey would be much easier!
The 1736 from bletchley has been cancelled due to a train failure so no opportunity to speak to any managers!
There was, obviously no one at bletchley on the platform to help passengers
Given the unit length issues that led to the 230s being ordered in the first place, the only viable options are 153 or 150 I think.I don't wish to trivialise the problems you are having on that line, but I must confess this did make me chuckle a bit. Sorry.
Its no secret that I was never a fan of this project, but by the sounds of things there are some really quite serious problems with these units. And to be honest if they can't be resolved quickly, and I don't mean by constantly swapping out poorly performing gensets, then there really needs to be another solution. It would be tempting to suggest Pacers, but in all honesty whilst being workhorses they are at end of life and if a small number were moved onto that line and started to fail, you'd be in exactly the same situation that you are in now. Perhaps its time to rethink the 230 solution, and look to existing stock that can be made, or is DDA compliant and is reliable enough to be able to be run as a microfleet.
Given the unit length issues that led to the 230s being ordered in the first place, the only viable options are 153 or 150 I think.
Agreed, unless they can simply redeploy within WMRThen I would say trying to secure some 150s would be the viable option, though it may need some horsetrading with a TOC currently operating them.
Agreed, unless they can simply redeploy within WMR
Apologies, I didn't realise they'd already gone. Northern is the next place to look I suppose.WMR no longer have 150s. Three of those would do the trick though.
A 2x20m EMU? there aren't many of those and they're both DC third rail. Electrifying with third rail is out of fashion these days, for good reason.Get the bloody line electrified and get some EMUs on there
Ask GA for a shortened 755? Won't even need electrification.A 2x20m EMU? there aren't many of those and they're both DC third rail. Electrifying with third rail is out of fashion these days, for good reason.
Get the bloody line electrified and get some EMUs on there