TFW To Shake Up Rail Timetables

[Anonymous10]

I used to commute on the Marches and now I WFH partially due to COVID and I just have to say I'm so glad I don't have to use that garbage service any more. Eight YEARS of overcrowded late trains and empty promises. I don't know what they would have to do to lure me back but a guarantee not to run 2 car sets any more would be a start

So long as the plans for 4 carriages minimum is held that's great

 

[Bletchleyite]

So long as the plans for 4 carriages minimum is held that's great

Once the 197s are all delivered I don't believe there's a plan for single 2-cars anywhere other than the branch lines and the Cambrian services that don't have a Pwllheli portion plus west of Mach. Marches services should either be 5.Mk4 or 5.197.

While I get that using TfW at the moment is grim, they do have a plan to fix things, it's just taking a bit of time, it's not like CrossCountry where there's no plan at all to deal with overcrowding issues.

 

[Krokodil]

Once the 197s are all delivered I don't believe there's a plan for single 2-cars anywhere other than the branch lines and the Cambrian services that don't have a Pwllheli portion plus west of Mach.

Unless plans have changed the intention was to use 2 car 197s between Shrewsbury and Holyhead on the Birmingham services. Also between Chester and Llandudno on the Liverpool services.

 

[craigybagel]

Once the 197s are all delivered I don't believe there's a plan for single 2-cars anywhere other than the branch lines and the Cambrian services that don't have a Pwllheli portion plus west of Mach. Marches services should either be 5.Mk4 or 5.197.

While I get that using TfW at the moment is grim, they do have a plan to fix things, it's just taking a bit of time, it's not like CrossCountry where there's no plan at all to deal with overcrowding issues.

5 max for Manchester, less for the other services. But an increase in frequency so still an increase in capacity.

Unless plans have changed the intention was to use 2 car 197s between Shrewsbury and Holyhead on the Birmingham services. Also between Chester and Llandudno on the Liverpool services.

Likewise there's still a capacity gain on those sections through additional services - so long as they don't get dropped under this review.

 

[Jez]

Nah, Newport-Crosskeys is the one right at the back. It hasn't had any trains on Monday-Saturday for months now. Fortunately there are 6 buses an hour running almost parallel with the line though.

Also Newport to Crosskeys is quite a new service and not as likely to be missed as much especially as I believe the plan is to eventually extend to Ebbw Vale which they need for real growth. Its surprising they have targeted the HOWL this time as there is no alternative train service for that route. At least some other routes have alterative trains, for example if they cancelled Cheltenham to Cardiff there is the XC train. With Conwy Valley it is shorter compared to the HOWL and a replacement bus wouldn't have as big an impact.

 

[Kite159]

Also Newport to Crosskeys is quite a new service and not as likely to be missed as much especially as I believe the plan is to eventually extend to Ebbw Vale which they need for real growth. Its surprising they have targeted the HOWL this time as there is no alternative train service for that route. At least some other routes have alterative trains, for example if they cancelled Cheltenham to Cardiff there is the XC train. With Conwy Valley it is shorter compared to the HOWL and a replacement bus wouldn't have as big an impact.

Makes sense in a way, better to focus the resources (both staff + rolling stock) onto services more passengers will use. Ie Pembroke Dock line (which itself will suffer tomorrow with the lack of GWR trains*).

(*I presume)

Heart of Wales isn't the busiest of routes

 

[Krokodil]

Likewise there's still a capacity gain on those sections through additional services

Which by my reckoning will be just enough to stop leaving passengers behind on the platform, but not enough to ensure that most passengers get a seat. Boosting the frequency and adding more direct routes will boost ridership too, such that services will be swamped without increases in train lengths. It's just like Operation Princess all over again.

 

[craigybagel]

Which by my reckoning will be just enough to stop leaving passengers behind on the platform, but not enough to ensure that most passengers get a seat. Boosting the frequency and adding more direct routes will boost ridership too, such that services will be swamped without increases in train lengths. It's just like Operation Princess all over again.

Which is why hopefully this review will see excess capacity taken from routes that don't need it to routes that do.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

December 2023 timetable and service update

We know that lots of things have changed in recent years but our ambition to build a railway that meets the needs of current and future generations remains constant. Our railway is critical to making sustainable transport the easiest way for people to travel across Wales and its borders.

news.tfw.wales

As I see it, this is another interim announcement about how the new fleets will be deployed in the short term.
Apart from Liverpool-Chester going back to hourly, the other proposed improvements are deferred from December 2023.
But the language used allows for these improvements to be canned indefinitely, which is now the subject of the James Price statement and review.

I also remember First Group promising 5-car (2+3 car) class 175 services in North Wales before ATW took over - it never happened, because reliability was never sufficient.
So 2/3-car single units remained the norm, only now with TfW often reduced to 2-car because that's all that is available.

Increasing service frequency through Chester (to Llandudno Jn and Shrewsbury/Cardiff) now looks a distant prospect.

And just a mention that until 2003 there were NO through trains from South Wales to North Wales, beyond the single Cardiff-Crewe-Holyhead run by RR W&W.
The service axes were Birmingham-Shrewsbury-Chester (Central) and Birmingham-Crewe/Manchester-Chester-North Wales (NWT/FNW).

 

[allaction]

Is TfW the only TOC whose Chair and CEO have no direct experience of working for a TOC? This is a genuine question.

Chair Scott Waddington worked in hospitality - mostly for Brains Brewery - and CEO James Price latterly worked in the Civil Service, albeit in the Transport sector of it for part of that time. Prior to his appointment to TfW, he looked after the Welsh Government’s interest in the Circuit of Wales project.

Would career railway people have made a difference to the current situation at TfW, and how, or is this problem simply a victim of circumstances beyond anyone’s control?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would career railway people have made a difference to the current situation at TfW, and how, or is this problem simply a victim of circumstances beyond anyone’s control?

Assuming whoever is in charge of 175 maintenance does have railway experience, then I doubt it would have made any difference. TfW have been short of stock for ages (with the 197s and Mk4s fixing this), but the current "crunch" relates almost entirely to 175s catching fire.

 

[Topological]

I think it is clear that replacing your key fleet using the same depot and maintenance teams is not a good idea. Someone had that idea with the result that the 175s hit problems and... That has been widely covered.

However, I am surprised that the wider experience of the leaders of TfW did not flag the benefits of brownfield development in Wales for the new 197 depot. So many rail connected sites that could have been used. Yes, it is expensive, but the decisions were pre-Covid and the regeneration impacts could have really helped wherever was chosen.

Now we are looking at revising services to make the provision less optimal.

The Mk4 decision has some motivation, but it does feel like it is about the vanity of having "Intercity" stock rather than the best solution.

 

[allaction]

Assuming whoever is in charge of 175 maintenance does have railway experience, then I doubt it would have made any difference. TfW have been short of stock for ages (with the 197s and Mk4s fixing this), but the current "crunch" relates almost entirely to 175s catching fire.

Who would have made the decision to change the Class 175 maintenance regime, order the Class 230 units and buy them outright, rather than lease them, and who would have signed off this expenditure? Are those without direct railway experience totally reliant on their colleagues who have this experience?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Who would have made the decision to change the Class 175 maintenance regime, order the Class 230 units and buy them outright, rather than lease them, and who would have signed off this expenditure? Are those without direct railway experience totally reliant on their colleagues who have this experience?

CEOs need to be experienced at running businesses, and they employ people to deal with technical aspects. This is almost 100% universal in commerce. Very rarely will the CEO of Widget Making Ltd ever have actually made a widget these days.

It might of course be that the MD/CEO isn't doing this competently, but it's rather separate from the industry they were previously in.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Is TfW the only TOC whose Chair and CEO have no direct experience of working for a TOC? This is a genuine question.

Chair Scott Waddington worked in hospitality - mostly for Brains Brewery - and CEO James Price latterly worked in the Civil Service, albeit in the Transport sector of it for part of that time. Prior to his appointment to TfW, he looked after the Welsh Government’s interest in the Circuit of Wales project.

Would career railway people have made a difference to the current situation at TfW, and how, or is this problem simply a victim of circumstances beyond anyone’s control?

I think the people named run Transport for Wales, the Welsh Government body, rather than the TOC directly.
Its transport interests are wider than just the rail operation.
The formal TOC (Transport for Wales Rail Services) is run as a subsidiary and the MD is Jan Chaudhry-van der Velde who is certainly a rail professional.
He was MD of Merseyrail and then West Midlands Trains before being appointed MD of TfW Rail.
He has a career stretching back to BR, with a number of management roles at different TOCs before the top job at Merseyrail.

 

[Stephen1001]

Disappointed to see a constant hourly tfw Cheltenham been pushed back. Although Crosscountry do operate 1tph on that route aswell. Is it worth Tfw tranferring the stopper over to GWR or Crosscountry.

Certainly disappointing, but a transfer probably wouldn't be in our interests - although GWR have improved in recent months the TfW service is still the one I feel like I can most rely of all those serving Gloucester and Cheltenham, and realistically if it came under anyone else there wouldn't be any enhancements even proposed in the current circumstances.

 

[Krokodil]

Which is why hopefully this review will see excess capacity taken from routes that don't need it to routes that do.

Where is this excess capacity? It's not in the North, everything I see is running around full (unless you count the Bidstons but you're not going to redeploy the 230s elsewhere). Full & standing reports often come in as far west as Bangor. Guards are refusing to take certain trains if they get short-formed on the basis that it's not safe.

- Shrewsbury-Birmingham is often pretty wedged too from what I gather, and anything heading towards Barmouth will be like the black hole of Calcutta in the summer. You can't reasonably thin out the two-hourly service on the Pwllhelis without the politicians kicking up an almighty stink - particularly as many of those trains are school trains.

Full & standing on the Marches. In fact, scrolling through Twitter it's just a long stream of complaints about two-car DMUs.

I've no idea what things are like on the Valley Lines these days. But even if the Valleys are less busy than they used to be, you can't exactly poach class 398s to strengthen the Marches like you can with 150s.

 

[Bow Fell]

Assuming whoever is in charge of 175 maintenance does have railway experience, then I doubt it would have made any difference. TfW have been short of stock for ages (with the 197s and Mk4s fixing this), but the current "crunch" relates almost entirely to 175s catching fire.

It’s worth pointing out that the hyperbole elsewhere that TfW gave up maintaining their 175’s is of course nonsense.

Any TOC / Maintainer that did that would be violating the safety case and that would land them in very hot water (especially considering the thermal incidents)

You can’t just stop doing exams (A or B etc) or UAT they are cyclic preventative maintenance and time and distance sensitive.

Targeted campaigns like door maintenance and health checks as well as engine maintenance are a different story which is more likely why the situation arose.

 

[Topological]

Notice issued to Transport for Wales Rail Limited on 17 March 2023​

• Issue date: 17 March 2023
• Compliance date: 17 September 2023
• Status: Open
• Public register ID: l/ RJB/17032023/ROGS19

Description:

Transport for Wales Limited as the Train Operator have failed to ensure so far as is reasonably practicable that passengers and employees are not exposed to the risk of harm. Three fires have occurred within a one month period between February and March 2023 onboard class 175 trains whilst in passenger service. The operator has failed to implement effective arrangements for the organisation, control and monitoring for the maintenance of the class 175 fleet needed to ensure the safe operation of the transport system.

This quote is taken from Office of Rail and Road

So I do not think there is any "hyperbole" about what happened.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

This quote is taken from Office of Rail and Road

So I do not think there is any "hyperbole" about what happened.

So what are they going to do, withdraw all 175s immediately and further wreck their already shambolic mainline service?

 

[Topological]

So what are they going to do, withdraw all 175s immediately and further wreck their already shambolic mainline service?

Maintain them I guess

We will see what the ORR come back with in September.

The point remains that the decision to base the 197s in Chester and hence to reduce the capacity for 175s was taken by TfW. It is not "hyperbole" as was suggested in the post to which I responded to say that the decisions relating to the capacity to maintain 175s has created problems on the Marches.

Therefore the talk about maintenance is not "nonsense" because the ORR take it seriously.

 

[Bow Fell]

If you can provide evidence that scheduled preventative maintenance exams were missed, or units went over exam mileage and time tolerances then I’m all ears. That’s what my post was concerning, you can’t just stop doing them.

If you read this bit, this is my suggestion of what more likely happened

“Targeted campaigns like door maintenance and health checks as well as engine maintenance are a different story which is more likely why the situation arose”

 

[Topological]

If you can provide evidence that scheduled preventative maintenance exams were missed, or units went over exam mileage and time tolerances then I’m all ears. That’s what my post was concerning, you can’t just stop doing them.

If you read this bit, this is my suggestion of what more likely happened

“Targeted campaigns like door maintenance and health checks as well as engine maintenance are a different story which is more likely why the situation arose”

Thanks for the clarification. I am glad you also say that TfW are culpable for the mess that has been the Marches this year.

I just worry that "they are trying their best" is becoming the dominant narrative when the situation is entirely of TfWs own making.

Eventually all of this will be over, but it is sounding like more excuses and delays are being prepped for.

 

[Llanigraham]

- Shrewsbury-Birmingham is often pretty wedged too from what I gather, and anything heading towards Barmouth will be like the black hole of Calcutta in the summer. You can't reasonably thin out the two-hourly service on the Pwllhelis without the politicians kicking up an almighty stink - particularly as many of those trains are school trains

Shrewsbury - Brum can be full at some times of the day, and it is interesting to note that people seem to prefer the TfW service against the parallel, and less full, running West Mids service.

 

[markymark2000]

I've no idea what things are like on the Valley Lines these days. But even if the Valleys are less busy than they used to be, you can't exactly poach class 398s to strengthen the Marches like you can with 150s.

Even if Valleys were really quiet, the services aren't doubled up so you'd only make unit savings by cutting the timetable. Of course when the 398s come in, there is no potential to save units for use elsewhere.

The point remains that the decision to base the 197s in Chester and hence to reduce the capacity for 175s was taken by TfW. It is not "hyperbole" as was suggested in the post to which I responded to say that the decisions relating to the capacity to maintain 175s has created problems on the Marches.

Given how far the 175s reach though, what would have stopped maintenance happening at some other sites around the TFW network? Crewe, Swansea, Cardiff, Alstom Longsight? While it wouldn't have been perfect, it would have kept trains maintained while the new sets come in. I am sure that this issue doesn't arise every single time new units are brought onto the network.

 

[Topological]

Given how far the 175s reach though, what would have stopped maintenance happening at some other sites around the TFW network? Crewe, Swansea, Cardiff, Alstom Longsight? While it wouldn't have been perfect, it would have kept trains maintained while the new sets come in. I am sure that this issue doesn't arise every single time new units are brought onto the network.

Also true

Although it is presumably easier to keep using the same depot.

All the IET depots on GWR are new and I am sure Ardwick was new in Manchester to support TPE going to the 185s (There is a new one at York as well?).

The only comparable case I cannot really comment on is the introduction of 195s for Northern, though I am sure they cleared space in Wigan and Leyland that did not used to stable units.

 

[craigybagel]

Where is this excess capacity? It's not in the North, everything I see is running around full (unless you count the Bidstons but you're not going to redeploy the 230s elsewhere). Full & standing reports often come in as far west as Bangor. Guards are refusing to take certain trains if they get short-formed on the basis that it's not safe.

- Shrewsbury-Birmingham is often pretty wedged too from what I gather, and anything heading towards Barmouth will be like the black hole of Calcutta in the summer. You can't reasonably thin out the two-hourly service on the Pwllhelis without the politicians kicking up an almighty stink - particularly as many of those trains are school trains.

Full & standing on the Marches. In fact, scrolling through Twitter it's just a long stream of complaints about two-car DMUs.

I've no idea what things are like on the Valley Lines these days. But even if the Valleys are less busy than they used to be, you can't exactly poach class 398s to strengthen the Marches like you can with 150s.

There clearly isn't excess capacity at the moment, but we're nowhere near having the full fleet in service yet. TfW seem to think that going forward some of the original plans will result in excess capacity on some routes, and are looking at changing that, hence the study.

 

[Kite159]

Shrewsbury - Brum can be full at some times of the day, and it is interesting to note that people seem to prefer the TfW service against the parallel, and less full, running West Mids service.

People prefer a shorter journey time without stopping at all the stations to Wolverhampton.

 

[Krokodil]

Maintain them I guess

We will see what the ORR come back with in September.

The point remains that the decision to base the 197s in Chester and hence to reduce the capacity for 175s was taken by TfW. It is not "hyperbole" as was suggested in the post to which I responded to say that the decisions relating to the capacity to maintain 175s has created problems on the Marches.

Therefore the talk about maintenance is not "nonsense" because the ORR take it seriously.

Neither you, nor I are privy to the maintenance schedules for 175s. We don't know how often (if at all) Alstom's manual mandated that the charge air coolers be non-destructively tested for cracks.

There clearly isn't excess capacity at the moment, but we're nowhere near having the full fleet in service yet. TfW seem to think that going forward some of the original plans will result in excess capacity on some routes, and are looking at changing that, hence the study.

I still can't work out where that would be though. The only place where train lengths were due to increase was the Marches and that's unlikely to change. Otherwise, I can't think of what enhancements on the mainline might be binned. Liverpools are here to stay, though maybe they'll knock the through trains to Cardiff on the head. Would they abandon the hourly service on the Cambrian main line?

Only thing that I can think of is the South Wales commuter routes, but that won't yield rolling stock for elsewhere - unless the plan is to free up FLIRTs to displace the remaining 153s from service in West Wales.

 

[tomuk]

Shrewsbury - Brum can be full at some times of the day, and it is interesting to note that people seem to prefer the TfW service against the parallel, and less full, running West Mids service.

The stopper is slower, albeit not massively, and follows the TfW Express. You might force some further custom if it ran in the other currently unused hourly path before the TfW

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jul 2023 ==

Also true

Although it is presumably easier to keep using the same depot.

All the IET depots on GWR are new and I am sure Ardwick was new in Manchester to support TPE going to the 185s (There is a new one at York as well?).

The only comparable case I cannot really comment on is the introduction of 195s for Northern, though I am sure they cleared space in Wigan and Leyland that did not used to stable units.

It has become the norm in the UK for the manufacturer to maintain the stock on a long term basis see new depots at Central Rivers, Northam, Kings Langley, Ardwick, Redhill etc. It is generally only the old BR stock still maintained in TOC depots or where the new stock supplemented existing BR era stock rather than fleet replacement.