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!
No I'm not. I'm saying that a four car fixed-formation unit comes in knackered, and a fresh four car fixed-formation unit comes out of the yard to replace it. Use an island platform and the swap can be very slick. Try cramming four coaches' worth of passengers into a two car unit and it won't be slick at all. Though of course if the minimum unit length was three coaches then you'd have a bit more wiggle room anyway. There are almost no 197 diagrams where a two coach unit is adequate for the full day.
And that original 4 car train knows it has to break down at Chester?
If a double set breaks down anywhere on the network it can be short formed and the journey continue.
But a lot of what you're talking about is "what if's". Under the current TFW plan as I see it on days where the fleet position is good then most of the marches is 5 cars, most of North Wales - Manchester is 3 cars, most of North Wales - Birmingham is 4 cars but that varies with the 158 situation.
But things go wrong, and as TFW haven't as yet completed their fleet renewal program, there is little contingency.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
@Jacob Porrett and/or @SeaKing, would it be 4x 197s (197023/026/032/037) in Crewe Carriage Sidings? (Those are now the only 4 units left in the list with ???s)
Other than those, the list has been updated @Peter Sarf
Chester is not the only place that a hot spare gets diagrammed. Canton will definitely have one, and I'm pretty sure that Abbey Foregate does too. Obviously you won't necessarily see those parked up on a given day because they may well have been used to plug gaps in availability (that is what spares are for, after all).
There aren't enough vehicles. The new fleet represented a 50% increase compared with old. Sounds great in theory. Except that peak* overcrowding of many trains with the old fleet was way more than 50%. Add on extra services (Operation Princess effect) and subtract the 230s which are still showing no signs of being reliable in service. 197 availability forecasts were very ambitious compared with the 175s they replaced and even once the bathtub curve has bottomed out I very much doubt that they'll meet them.
*Peak here doesn't just mean commuter flows, there remains severe overcrowding caused by leisure travel.
Then I suggest that you turn up at Chester on a Sunday in good time for the 12:00 to Holyhead. Then you can see first hand exactly where things haven't changed since ATW.
Cannot disagree with this more.
Firstly, what hot spare? If there's spares sat around, why aren't they being used to strengthen other services that you keep saying there are?
You're saying a 4 car set comes out of service, so use the spare 2 car (which may or may not be there), meaning kicking everyone off the 4 car set and moving to the 2 car set.... instead of a 4 or 5 car train being split with the faulty unit, lets say a 3 car, being taken out of service and the 2 car continuing it's journey. It would just mean moving passengers, but at least those in the 2 car don't have to move.
Shortening formations LTP/STP results in severe overcrowding - What exactly do you suggest they do? At least if it's planned in advance then everyone knows what's going on and there aren't short notice changes on the day and people having to change trains.
Lets not forget as well that the fleet renewal for TFW still isn't complete until the 398s are introduced. Once they come into service more 197's will be cascaded to the routes they should be on.
We know the reliability of the 197's isn't great and on occasions TFW still struggle with capacity issues, but at the same time things are very different to where they were just a few years ago.
You sound like a disgruntled employee. Maybe you should share your views with TFW Management rather than on a rail forum where nothing will get done about it.
We are not short of rail connected yards in South Wales, but there has been a shortage of willingness to add a depot. Margam might not be optimal, but it is there, and there are many others that could be used.
It just seems to be the direct environs of Cardiff Central that are constrained.
Do you think that we habitually uncouple knackers at Hereford and Swansea? Usual situation is that Train A (a two car) has a fault, generally one that allows it to limp home (if it's not then you'll need a spare unit to go and rescue it anyway). Train B (a four car) gets split at Cardiff, Shrewsbury or Chester and one of the units forms Train A.
Or a unit gets brought out of the yard to restart the service. This already happens. Even where there isn't a hot spare in Middle Yard, CAF might get a call to see if they've got anything that wasn't available for the start of service but is ready now. I once had a brand new 197, never used before, pressed into service this way.
Do you think that we habitually uncouple knackers at Hereford and Swansea? Usual situation is that Train A (a two car) has a fault, generally one that allows it to limp home (if it's not then you'll need a spare unit to go and rescue it anyway). Train B (a four car) gets split at Cardiff, Shrewsbury or Chester and one of the units forms Train A.
Or a unit gets brought out of the yard to restart the service. This already happens. Even where there isn't a hot spare in Middle Yard, CAF might get a call to see if they've got anything that wasn't available for the start of service but is ready now. I once had a brand new 197, never used before, pressed into service this way.
Cannot disagree with this more.
Firstly, what hot spare? If there's spares sat around, why aren't they being used to strengthen other services that you keep saying there are?
You're saying a 4 car set comes out of service, so use the spare 2 car (which may or may not be there), meaning kicking everyone off the 4 car set and moving to the 2 car set.... instead of a 4 or 5 car train being split with the faulty unit, lets say a 3 car, being taken out of service and the 2 car continuing it's journey. It would just mean moving passengers, but at least those in the 2 car don't have to move.
Shortening formations LTP/STP results in severe overcrowding - What exactly do you suggest they do? At least if it's planned in advance then everyone knows what's going on and there aren't short notice changes on the day and people having to change trains.
Lets not forget as well that the fleet renewal for TFW still isn't complete until the 398s are introduced. Once they come into service more 197's will be cascaded to the routes they should be on.
We know the reliability of the 197's isn't great and on occasions TFW still struggle with capacity issues, but at the same time things are very different to where they were just a few years ago.
You sound like a disgruntled employee. Maybe you should share your views with TFW Management rather than on a rail forum where nothing will get done about it.
I don’t think the last bit is a fair comment to make about Krokodil, I think krokodil and other north TFW staff on here provide a balanced and honest opinion on here and will defend the company when they think a poster is being unfair. That being said it has been noticeable in recent months that frustration is growing among staff on behalf of passengers at the service being provided, I wouldn’t call them disgruntled in anyway though!
Extra depots cost money. Buying more 197s costs money. TfW and the Welsh Assembly don't have a magic money pot. What should have been cut to afford the extra depots and larger fleet that some posters think should have been procured?
Extra depots cost money. Buying more 197s costs money. TfW and the Welsh Assembly don't have a magic money pot. What should have been cut to afford the extra depots and larger fleet that some posters think should have been procured?
Frankly trying to renew the entire company's fleet in one go was a mistake (and TfW have admitted as such). They should just have renewed the Valleys fleet, kept the 175s and 158s for a bit longer, and supplemented with extra rolling stock. 180s for example, if anyone could make those things run reliably it would be Alstom at Chester. Would have been perfect for Manchester-South Wales. Obviously there are issues getting hold of the fleet though the ex-Hull ones should have been available at the right time. Then renew the long-distance fleet when it's actually life-expired, not when it's only 20 years old.
It's also worth remembering that running short formations around at frequent intervals is inefficient crew-wise.
Extra depots cost money. Buying more 197s costs money. TfW and the Welsh Assembly don't have a magic money pot. What should have been cut to afford the extra depots and larger fleet that some posters think should have been procured?
To be fair it’s not just a case of what posters think should be done,TFW are actually doing both now! the recently opened Barry depot wasn’t part of the original TFW plans if I remember correctly but they’ve done it! (Add in Shrewsbury sidings work) also TFW have just in the last few weeks been instructed to procure more stock by the Welsh assembly. So not fantasy on these forums as both points you mention have or are actually happening without cuts.
Chester is not the only place that a hot spare gets diagrammed. Canton will definitely have one, and I'm pretty sure that Abbey Foregate does too. Obviously you won't necessarily see those parked up on a given day because they may well have been used to plug gaps in availability (that is what spares are for, after all).
There aren't enough vehicles. The new fleet represented a 50% increase compared with old. Sounds great in theory. Except that peak* overcrowding of many trains with the old fleet was way more than 50%. Add on extra services (Operation Princess effect) and subtract the 230s which are still showing no signs of being reliable in service. 197 availability forecasts were very ambitious compared with the 175s they replaced and even once the bathtub curve has bottomed out I very much doubt that they'll meet them.
These are both contradictions of each other. If the fleet isn't reliable then there won't be the spares available to cover them. Unless you're proposing leaving hot spares for on the day breakdowns and running short forms at start of day?
Frankly trying to renew the entire company's fleet in one go was a mistake (and TfW have admitted as such). They should just have renewed the Valleys fleet, kept the 175s and 158s for a bit longer, and supplemented with extra rolling stock. 180s for example, if anyone could make those things run reliably it would be Alstom at Chester. Would have been perfect for Manchester-South Wales. Obviously there are issues getting hold of the fleet though the ex-Hull ones should have been available at the right time. Then renew the long-distance fleet when it's actually life-expired, not when it's only 20 years old.
The fleet renewal in one go was definitely a short sighted big mistake and has not gone well.
There were only 27 175's vs now double that of 197's. So you'd still be getting 2 or 3 car 175's working Manchester services to North Wales and South Wales. Also lets not forget Tallerdig wasn't in anyones plans, and 197's are picking up the slack on 158 routes already. The 158's are still in the fleet and won't be going anywhere until the switch over to ETCS 197's.
The class 180 are not a very reliable fleet, if TFW picked them up it would have been because no-one else wanted them. But TOC's are desperate for rolling stock so there aren't many spares around, new stock was needed. So you'd be subbing more imaginary hot spares for broken 180's.
No-one is doubting that there are still often days where capacity isn't sufficient. 150's are often subbing for 197s that are either short of or 197's covering other fleets. Ultimately there are enough 197's delivered to cover the timetable, but things go wrong and sometimes the capacity doesn't match what's booked. But TFW are not at the end of the fleet introduction program, so until that is complete, then it's not a true picture of whether TFW's fleet plans are working. There will be at least 10 197's freed up from what will eventually be 231 work, which will make a huge difference, North and South.
While it's not good having a 2 car on North Wales on a Sunday, one train example on one day of poor planning isn't a reflection of the capacity over the whole week.
Frankly trying to renew the entire company's fleet in one go was a mistake (and TfW have admitted as such). They should just have renewed the Valleys fleet, kept the 175s and 158s for a bit longer, and supplemented with extra rolling stock.
I do agree that a long-term phased introduction of new stock is much better than a big-bang replacement. However, there have already been plenty enough complaints about the imbalance of investment between south and north Wales. I can just imagine how any suggestion that north Wales should just soldier on with the 158s and 175s, whilst South Wales got all the new trains, would have gone down!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
To be fair it’s not just a case of what posters think should be done,TFW are actually doing both now! the recently opened Barry depot wasn’t part of the original TFW plans if I remember correctly but they’ve done it! (Add in Shrewsbury sidings work) also TFW have just in the last few weeks been instructed to procure more stock by the Welsh assembly. So not fantasy on these forums as both points you mention have or are actually happening without cuts.
The logic is really that a different depot would have allowed the 175s to continue until they were replaced by 197s. That would have saved miles for the 150s which could then have soldiered on longer on the valleys before hitting their exams instead of running so many Manchester trips (unless exams are timed only, sorry I am an outsider).
All that has passed now and we survived the 150s going to Manchester. That was a very bad example of 2-car services.
I hope there will be space to increase the 197 fleet so that there can be longer trains in North Wales and no issues with getting 4/5 car on every service to Manchester. Lets see what this new procurement brings.
Although there is an argument for bi-modes, more 197s might also be the answer for Cardiff-Bristol services if the wires are not going into Temple Meads.
Neither were 175s when they were first introduced. As I said, if anyone could make 180s work reliably it would be Alstom Chester. They'd have been ideal for the work now being done by the LHCS sets.
As I've said previously, they wouldn't be "more 197s" anyway, because new train orders are now all about battery electric (for non-electrified lines) or multi-mode (for both non-electrified and electrified lines) - no more pure diesel.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Although there is an argument for bi-modes, more 197s might also be the answer for Cardiff-Bristol services if the wires are not going into Temple Meads.
To be fair it’s not just a case of what posters think should be done,TFW are actually doing both now! the recently opened Barry depot wasn’t part of the original TFW plans if I remember correctly but they’ve done it! (Add in Shrewsbury sidings work) also TFW have just in the last few weeks been instructed to procure more stock by the Welsh assembly. So not fantasy on these forums as both points you mention have or are actually happening without cuts.
Ken Skates has asked TfW to "start the procurement process" for more trains.
That's well short of a commitment to actually acquire extra trains, which in any case will be beyond the Senedd elections next May, when the Welsh government and its rail budget might look a bit different.
Is it still the plan / ambition of TfW, once the fleet renewal process is complete, to have all Cardiff to Manchester, and all north to south Wales (Cardiff to Holyhead) services as 5 cars, whether that's 5 car 197s or 5 car LHCS?
Ordering more centre cars for 197s does seem the most logical step, so that all 197s are minimum 4 or 5 cars.
I don't believe there was ever a plan for Cardiff - Holyhead to go all 5 car, and between Cardiff and Chester that would be more capacity than required. It might be different along the coast in summer, but that more shows up the challenges of running so many Holyhead services to Cardiff when few passengers are travelling beyond Chester.
There are still plenty of routes for which 2 and 3 car services are enough capacity, and TfW is a heavily subsidised TOC as it is. On paper, 2 and 3 car sets give a lot more flexibility to cope with a network with such vast differences in needs. Of course, that does require more of the fleets (both CAF & Stadler) to be available and fully functioning.
I don't believe there was ever a plan for Cardiff - Holyhead to go all 5 car, and between Cardiff and Chester that would be more capacity than required. It might be different along the coast in summer, but that more shows up the challenges of running so many Holyhead services to Cardiff when few passengers are travelling beyond Chester.
There are still plenty of routes for which 2 and 3 car services are enough capacity, and TfW is a heavily subsidised TOC as it is. On paper, 2 and 3 car sets give a lot more flexibility to cope with a network with such vast differences in needs. Of course, that does require more of the fleets (both CAF & Stadler) to be available and fully functioning.
Is it still the plan / ambition of TfW, once the fleet renewal process is complete, to have all Cardiff to Manchester, and all north to south Wales (Cardiff to Holyhead) services as 5 cars, whether that's 5 car 197s or 5 car LHCS?
Ordering more centre cars for 197s does seem the most logical step, so that all 197s are minimum 4 or 5 cars.
Cardiff - Holyhead was supposed to be 3 car 197's with standard premium, which never materialised, but are still booked 3 cars
Cardiff - Manchester is pretty much all booked 5 car 197's currently, with the exception of the 1930 & 2030 to Cardiff due to the originating 5 car service splitting to form those.
What's lacking is the capacity on Manchester - North Wales which are booked 3 cars, except the 4 peak time 5 car services. While 3 cars is often sufficient, consistent 4/5 car services is the long term plan which should be achievable when the 231's get moved.
The ideal scenario would be:
West Wales - Manchester - 5 cars
Cardiff - Holyhead - 3 cars
North Wales - Manchester - 4/5 cars
Maesteg / Ebbw Vale / Cheltenham - All 3 cars
Cardiff - Pembroke Dock - 3 cars
Shrewsbury - Birmingham - 4/5 cars
Chester - Crewe - 3 cars
Cardiff - Holyhead was supposed to be 3 car 197's with standard premium, which never materialised, but are still booked 3 cars
Cardiff - Manchester is pretty much all booked 5 car 197's currently, with the exception of the 1930 & 2030 to Cardiff due to the originating 5 car service splitting to form those.
What's lacking is the capacity on Manchester - North Wales which are booked 3 cars, except the 4 peak time 5 car services. While 3 cars is often sufficient, consistent 4/5 car services is the long term plan which should be achievable when the 231's get moved.
The ideal scenario would be:
West Wales - Manchester - 5 cars
Cardiff - Holyhead - 3 cars
North Wales - Manchester - 4/5 cars
Maesteg / Ebbw Vale / Cheltenham - All 3 cars
Cardiff - Pembroke Dock - 3 cars
Shrewsbury - Birmingham - 4/5 cars
Chester - Crewe - 3 cars
Personally, having done the journey, very few make the full trip, so i would cut most back and have them go to crewe, there's excellent connections there anyways. Then use the units this free's up to bolster services along the coast.
Cardiff - Holyhead was supposed to be 3 car 197's with standard premium, which never materialised, but are still booked 3 cars
Cardiff - Manchester is pretty much all booked 5 car 197's currently, with the exception of the 1930 & 2030 to Cardiff due to the originating 5 car service splitting to form those.
What's lacking is the capacity on Manchester - North Wales which are booked 3 cars, except the 4 peak time 5 car services. While 3 cars is often sufficient, consistent 4/5 car services is the long term plan which should be achievable when the 231's get moved.
The ideal scenario would be:
West Wales - Manchester - 5 cars
Cardiff - Holyhead - 3 cars
North Wales - Manchester - 4/5 cars
Maesteg / Ebbw Vale / Cheltenham - All 3 cars
Cardiff - Pembroke Dock - 3 cars
Shrewsbury - Birmingham - 4/5 cars
Chester - Crewe - 3 cars
Personally, having done the journey, very few make the full trip, so i would cut most back and have them go to crewe, there's excellent connections there anyways. Then use the units this free's up to bolster services along the coast.
What counts is how many people are on the train at each stage in the journey. Wrexham is a sizeable place that would be skipped if trains to/from south Wales only went via Crewe.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
