• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!

Longest journey on 'inappropriate' rolling stock

Status
Not open for further replies.

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,279
RAGNARØKR;1249973 said:
Funny though that capitalist countries like Sweden and Denmark manage to provide their passengers with a decent amount of space even on new trains. How do you explain that difference?

Well we could start with the stark staring obvious one that there are rather fewer people to shift around.

Population of Denmark 5.5 million approx
Population of Sweden 9.5 million approx
Population of Greater London - never mind all the large commuter towns nearby - 8 million approx
Population of UK in 2011 - 62 million approx.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I used to go to school on Class 423's which often called for no longer than 15 seconds at stations like Netley, Bursledon, etc.

A VEP with lots of doors avialable at small stations is hardly comparable with trying to get people on and off an HST in the middle of the rush-hour at Maidenhead, Reading, Didcot or Oxford in a hurry.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
6,228
RAGNARØKR;1249904 said:
The Hampshire 159s are serviced at Salisbury. The depot would not be wanting to service other types of stock, which is presumably why SWT got rid of Turbostars.

You could transfer a handful of 158s from SWT to FGW and then transfer the responsibility for the Romsey-Salisbury services to FGW as well. FGW could then run the service using 150s with 158s put on other more appropriate routes. It perhaps isn't as logical as SWT running the route but it wouldn't be completely inappropriate. The 150s could run back at Bristol at the start/end of the day, either attached to or forming another service. As long as the units get swapped about there is always the option of stabling units at Fratton and Westbury as well. Fratton and Westbury FGW crews aren't logistically that badly placed to work the services either.
 

ATW Alex 101

Established Member
Joined
28 Dec 2010
Messages
2,087
Location
Ellesmere port
In before anyone else: the nasty tendency of 350/2s (3+2) to turn up on London to Crewe services.

Don't know if this is scheduled or not but compared to a HST going the other way, having a 150/1 for Penzance - Plymouth journeys is torture!

Both I have done from end, the 350/2 I did Friday. The 150/1 was not actually that bad from Penzance to Plymouth but it's still definitely inappropriate for the route.

What I think is inappropriate is the use of 150's on any of the routes from Great Malven to the south coast, they take forever and it's just not something you operate with a commuter train. The 158's that are used however are ideal.

There is a service from Bristol Parkway to Penzance operated by a 150/1 as well, and that was the one I caught when on holiday in Cornwall when I went to Penzance. At penzance the train turned into one for Newton Abbot!

There is the one to Cardiff central as well which definitely should not be operated with a 150.

IMO the Overground stoppers to Watford Junction are inappropriate as well, what with their London Underground style seats, the 313's were better because they at least had proper seats.
 

Rich McLean

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2012
Messages
1,757
The 150's that run down to cornwall are largely those units, so that the unit which goes down to cornwall, and sometimes ends up on a branch, with the unit off the branch forming an up service to Plymouth/Exeter and sometimes beyond.

It would be great to have 158's on that route, but cornwall drivers do not have the traction knowlege, and 158's on cornish branch lines would then be seen as overkill and we would then be asking questions on why they are not on the longer runs. Also FGW have a limited pool of 158's
 

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
6,228
The limited number of 158s is the real reason. 158s used to be used on the services to Cornwall, but when FGW lost a lot of their 158s and reformed most the rest to 3-car units they were concentrated on the Portsmouth-Cardiff route. That meant none ran to Cornwall, so Penzance and Par crew lost 158 knowledge.
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
but when FGW lost a lot of their 158s and reformed most the rest to 3-car units

FGW still have the same number of 158s they originally started with. The extras were secured on short term loans to cover refurbishment programs but they managed to swap the ones they kept to keep the ones with the better seating and engines and off load the Wessex ones.

That's a bit like saying Northern lost their 180s - they weren't really Northern's as they belonged to East Coast and they were plugging a gap at Northern until 150s were available to cascade.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Didn't 14* up until recently work some cardiff to Exeter services? That was definitely inappropriate

14xs filled on on Holyhead-Manchester and TPE services before the franchises were revised.

Somewhere on the web there are pictures of a Merseytravel 142 at Holyhead saying 'Manchester Piccadilly' on the front and a 3 car 144 (before refurbishment) at Stockport with 'Cleethorpes' on the front.
 

BestWestern

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2011
Messages
6,736
You could transfer a handful of 158s from SWT to FGW and then transfer the responsibility for the Romsey-Salisbury services to FGW as well. FGW could then run the service using 150s with 158s put on other more appropriate routes. It perhaps isn't as logical as SWT running the route but it wouldn't be completely inappropriate. The 150s could run back at Bristol at the start/end of the day, either attached to or forming another service. As long as the units get swapped about there is always the option of stabling units at Fratton and Westbury as well. Fratton and Westbury FGW crews aren't logistically that badly placed to work the services either.

That's a reasonable suggestion on the face of it. I understand that the stations at Dean and Mottisfont & Dunbridge are still under FGW custody, along with Romsey of course, so the route is not entirely out of their territory. FGW crews also sign So'ton - Eastleigh and the Chandlers Ford road, so no route knowledge issues. There is also the issue that the company would like it's Fratton-based crews to be more productive, as they only sign Cardiff and Brighton at present, and there isn't a great deal of scope to sign much else due to the logistics of it all.

Of course, it won't happen though :|
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It maybe over the top but using a 450 IMO is seriously OTT.

I am very fond of the line having grown up round those parts but (and I am very embarrassed to say this) removing the juice and using a pacer would be quite acceptable.

I'd agree with that. There is, I feel, serious scope to look at whether Pacers can be further redeployed in years to come in some form of 'tram-train' style operation on small branches, like Lymington and numerous other locations where there is simply no real need for a heavy rail service, just a reliable shuttle of some kind. They may be unpopular for much of their current service use, but there is plenty of scope for them to run on branches and the like; they are cheap to operate, lightweight and already have the safety case for main operation line that they would need to undertake, for example coming off the Lymington line to Brockenhurst.

In the meantime, there are options available. ATW and Chiltern use 'Bubble cars' quite happily on restricted runs, why not use one here? I find it difficult to believe that a lack of spares would have been the real reason for SWT's decision to withdraw the 'Slammers, we are hardly talking about maintaining the space shuttle here, they aren't overly complex. One would have hoped that SWT might have saved some spares when they withdrew their mainstream fleet, but even if they did not then I find it difficult to believe that there could be much that couldn't be remanufactured if needed. Didn't the same excuse crop up for ditching the 442s at one point?!

I'm afraid it appears to me that SWT simply didn't fancy the minor ballache of maintaining a couple of 'non-standard' units, which in the current situation I really find unacceptable. Perhaps questions ought to be asked about how a TOC found themselves in the highly luxurious position of being able to simply discard two perfectly serviceable trains thanks to their overly generous allocation of stock?
 
Last edited:

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
6,228
FGW still have the same number of 158s they originally started with. The extras were secured on short term loans to cover refurbishment programs but they managed to swap the ones they kept to keep the ones with the better seating and engines and off load the Wessex ones.

That's a bit like saying Northern lost their 180s - they weren't really Northern's as they belonged to East Coast and they were plugging a gap at Northern until 150s were available to cascade.

Yes, but the 12 158s they lost to Northern in the reshuffle were replaced by the 12 142s which were in turn eventually replaced by the 150s, which meant a general reshuffle of the fleet meaning 158s were allocated to work entirely around the Bristol area. The creation of the three-car 158s reduced the number of units available to diagram as well.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,361
It seems the only way out of these problems with inappropriate stock is to buy new stock.

A single family of diesel and electric units that can work together with each other and use a single standard coupler, like the Sprinter's BSI coupler.

About five or six thousand vehicles probably for capacity expansion and replace everything else..... but that is obviously the high cost option.
 

Goatboy

Established Member
Joined
23 Jun 2011
Messages
2,274
It seems the only way out of these problems with inappropriate stock is to buy new stock.

It can't be the only way out - if we have inappropriate long distance stock on short runs and inappropriate short distance stock on long runs then some re-allocation might fix it.

Take SWT's 158's away from them and give them to FGW in return for some 150's and a training package for the fitters sounds like a good start. There is nothing about a 150 that makes it unsuitable for any of the routes SWT operate a 158 on (Assuming the West of England line is exclusively 159 still).

Of course re-allocation might be rather hard with todays fragemented railway.
 

PHILIPE

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Nov 2011
Messages
13,472
Location
Caerphilly
It seems the only way out of these problems with inappropriate stock is to buy new stock.

A single family of diesel and electric units that can work together with each other and use a single standard coupler, like the Sprinter's BSI coupler.

About five or six thousand vehicles probably for capacity expansion and replace everything else..... but that is obviously the high cost option.
New stock is just not bought like that. Rolling Stock is procured by DaFT who are not going to do it if there is Stock already available whether considered suitable or not for particular journeys.
 

RAGNARØKR

Member
Joined
1 Jun 2010
Messages
571
Location
Göteborg
Well we could start with the stark staring obvious one that there are rather fewer people to shift around.

Population of Denmark 5.5 million approx
Population of Sweden 9.5 million approx
Population of Greater London - never mind all the large commuter towns nearby - 8 million approx
Population of UK in 2011 - 62 million approx.
Yes but you said it was to do with capitalism. Now you are bringing population into the picture. But more people=more money, more tax revenue, more wealth, higher land values. With such low populations the Scandinavians have to spread everything more thinly. Then there is Germany which also provides better standards in its trains. Just to confuse the picture a bit more, most of the population of Sweden is concentrated into three conurbations and densities within those conurbations are as high as in conurbations anywhere in the UK. There is also significant commuting from about 50 km around the conurbations, just as in the rest of Europe.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It seems the only way out of these problems with inappropriate stock is to buy new stock.

A single family of diesel and electric units that can work together with each other and use a single standard coupler, like the Sprinter's BSI coupler.

About five or six thousand vehicles probably for capacity expansion and replace everything else..... but that is obviously the high cost option.
Perhaps but a fleet of very expensive IEPs has just been ordered and we shall see what people make of them.
 

jimm

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2012
Messages
5,279
RAGNARØKR;1250336 said:
Yes but you said it was to do with capitalism. Now you are bringing population into the picture. But more people=more money, more tax revenue, more wealth, higher land values. With such low populations the Scandinavians have to spread everything more thinly. Then there is Germany which also provides better standards in its trains. Just to confuse the picture a bit more, most of the population of Sweden is concentrated into three conurbations and densities within those conurbations are as high as in conurbations anywhere in the UK. There is also significant commuting from about 50 km around the conurbations, just as in the rest of Europe.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Perhaps but a fleet of very expensive IEPs has just been ordered and we shall see what people make of them.

I didn't say anything about capitalism - that was someone else.

I know much of the Swedish population is concentrated in a few areas but those concentrations and the numbers travelling simply do not measure up to the UK, especially around London. As for Germany provides better standards on its trains, there is plenty of rather basic stuff knocking about on German S-Bahn systems in my experience - it's not all ICEs with first class compartments.
 

bigdelboy

Member
Joined
9 Apr 2012
Messages
198
I think the Class 205 3H hampshire units worked portsmouth - bristol on occasion. :( Only one coach had the loo :oops: , and they weren't interconnected.

(I remember being on one but it got replaced by a 47 at salsbury.)

Wikipedia quotes the source ... Welch, Michael (2004). Southern DEMUs. Capital Transport. pp. 12–19. ISBN 1-85414-287-9.

The Hymeks used to do it ... replacd by 31/4 disasters so i suppose 205's were the only option.

Class 313 on Coastway now comes close.:cry:
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
44,413
Location
Yorks
455's on the Reading - Waterloo services on weekends in the early noughties. Particularly when there were CIG's and VEP's with toilets available.
 

Tomonthetrain

Established Member
Joined
12 Jul 2011
Messages
1,290
Oh c'mon, a Stagecoach 158 is hardly an unpleasant place to be!

You can have our 150/1s instead if you'd prefer?! ;)

Or even a pair of class 139s

The words you are looking for are "utterly destroyed". Tight curves, mile after mile of jointed track. For nearly four hours :o:o

Could replace guantanamo bay!

Also 313s on Southern are totally inappropriate. Especially without any loos!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,361
New stock is just not bought like that. Rolling Stock is procured by DaFT who are not going to do it if there is Stock already available whether considered suitable or not for particular journeys.

I know, this is the only sure fire way out but it is not one that will ever be taken, unless renationalisation actually occurs in the distant future and it is considered better value to build new state owned stock than purchase all the pre privatisation equipment remaining.
 

ATW Alex 101

Established Member
Joined
28 Dec 2010
Messages
2,087
Location
Ellesmere port
I swear sometime a few years back I had seen a pacer working a York service at Preston. That would have been hell.

Many a time at alfreton parkway I have seen 150 on Nottingham services with the 3+2 seating. I also seen a 156 on a norwich service once at Liverpool believe it or not
 

jnjkerbin

Member
Joined
25 Apr 2012
Messages
842
Location
Down south
A single 185 on a Manchester to Scarborough service in the hight of summer wasn't much fun but better than a pacer!
 

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
6,228
143 miles and 2h50 on a high capacity unit... (although compare that to 160 miles and 3h15 on a potentially similar train from London to Crewe).

450/5s arguably better than the 450/0s because they have had a slight reduction in seating so slightly more roomy. The ex-First Class section has plug sockets as well. You wouldn't be too happy if you'd paid for First Class though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top