co-tr-paul
Established Member
And chocolate and cream !
The Friday night includes a trip to Paignton leaving Paignton before the last train. I am surprised the opportunity to go down to Goodrington sidings wasn't taken. The planned trip weeks ago was cancelled. Maybe it has to be in daylight. I might pop down to see it.This coming Thursday night the units will have another test to Barnstaple, then on Friday night the class will reach the Exmouth branch for the first time.
Thursday Night:
Friday Night:
It's often the train guard that works the crossing, though sometimes the station staff do it on some daytime workings.The Friday night includes a trip to Paignton leaving Paignton before the last train. I am surprised the opportunity to go down to Goodrington sidings wasn't taken. The planned trip weeks ago was cancelled. Maybe it has to be in daylight. I might pop down to see it.
Having thought about Goodrington; Sands Road crossing is worked manually either by GWR staff or Dartmouth Steam Railway.
It's probably why the last Cross Country 2010 to Bristol shunts from platform 1 to 2 via the crossover because there is nobody there.
175003 taken out of service on the the Newquay branch due to engine issues. 175114 also pulled with similar problems on the main line.Today optimum passenger services but there are seven 3 car turbos. 5 on Paignton-Exmouth, 2 on Barnstaple (one on the 0722).
175007 did Paignton training. 175003 working Newquay. 175002, 175011, 175114 covering Exeter-Plymouth and one uncovered diagram.
175003 taken out of service on the the Newquay branch due to engine issues. 175114 also pulled with similar problems on the main line.
ATW / TfW had the full fleet out so plenty of other 175 units around to rescue if required, with the limited number of units GWR currently have running a rescue could be a big problem. Running one 175 and one 150 diagram on the Newquay branch means a failed unit is a big issue as the other one can't rescue it.Does GWR have a different policy regarding pulling units from service with engine problems as opposed to ATW and TfW ?
2 car running on one engine is a risk but pulling a 3 car if only one engine out is a bit precautionary I feel unless 2 engines are out.
Whilst it was in GWR livery, it is no longer a GWR unit, so needed a new livery.It seems rather ironic that the very first train to get GBR livery, 387 172 at Southern, had it replacing GWR livery, if trains are still going to be put into GWR livery after that.
When does confidence come? They have 16 units, 002 and 114 for 18 months. They only need 19 units for the envisaged service requirements; one of the reasons they have been able to cannibalise them to cover 5 diagrams. Only four today. I do wonder why TFW got rid of them, and before them First North Western so First Group who trade in the southwest as GWR until December. must have known about these trains.Thanks for putting it in perspective and I can appreciate that GWR haven't full confidence in the units just at the moment.
First NW got rid of them because the routes they worked went to whatever the Welsh operator was, didn’t they? TfW were going for the stock equivalent of tot route modernisation (à la Greater Anglia).When does confidence come? They have 16 units, 002 and 114 for 18 months. They only need 19 units for the envisaged service requirements; one of the reasons they have been able to cannibalise them to cover 5 diagrams. Only four today. I do wonder why TFW got rid of them, and before them First North Western so First Group who trade in the southwest as GWR until December. must have known about these trains.
When does confidence come? They have 16 units, 002 and 114 for 18 months. They only need 19 units for the envisaged service requirements; one of the reasons they have been able to cannibalise them to cover 5 diagrams. Only four today. I do wonder why TFW got rid of them, and before them First North Western so First Group who trade in the southwest as GWR until December. must have known about these trains.
First North Western didn’t “get rid of them because they must have known something”First NW got rid of them because the routes they worked went to whatever the Welsh operator was, didn’t they? TfW were going for the stock equivalent of tot route modernisation (à la Greater Anglia).
Looks like 175001 later took over from 175003 on the Newquay branch but then failed itself.175003 taken out of service on the the Newquay branch due to engine issues. 175114 also pulled with similar problems on the main line.
Bit like humans, really. Infectious diseases are no longer the killers that they once were in the Western World, so we live long enough to die of cancer or with Alzheimer's instead. If you can't get the doors to open / close at the first station, there probably hasn't been time for the engines to overheat or do whatever they're doing!I seem to notice a pattern whereas Laira find a new issue, iron it out completely, only for a new issue to suddenly start happening for them to then fix. It used to be doors and now it's engines failing!
That's a bit of a daft question, confidence will come when the units start to achieve more miles between failures, as has been pointed out many times by may posters, it takes time for crews to become familiar, engineering staff to become familiar and for general faults from sitting idle for two years to go away.When does confidence come?
Exactly. 16 trains and only 4/5 diagrams covered. It doesn't inspire confidence.That's a bit of a daft question, confidence will come when the units start to achieve more miles between failures, as has been pointed out many times by may posters, it takes time for crews to become familiar, engineering staff to become familiar and for general faults from sitting idle for two years to go away.
I know you keep pointing out that a couple of the units have been used on training runs etc for a while, yes they have, but empty runs with minimal use of the doors is nothing like running in service with the doors being cycled at every station.
I don't think 175s will be replacing the 150 on the Newquay branch for Boardmasters. If anything I think the opposite will be wanted! Consider the 150 door layout is better for dealing with masses of people, and the GWR folks might be more willing to trust that a 150 can get through the diagram without breaking down. But that would rely on there being more 150s handy, and that might be a struggle...175s as yesterday working four out of five diagrams. 175007 did the Paignton run again and 175114-175011 having a run together to Newton Abbot. I wonder if they will be used for Boardmasters at Newquay before chancing Barnstaple.
Seven out of 16 trains is an improvement.
The only remote possibility is if they manage to cover one OKE or Barny diagram - though officially that's not happening until the end of August.I don't think 175s will be replacing the 150 on the Newquay branch for Boardmasters. If anything I think the opposite will be wanted! Consider the 150 door layout is better for dealing with masses of people, and the GWR folks might be more willing to trust that a 150 can get through the diagram without breaking down. But that would rely on there being more 150s handy, and that might be a struggle...
You've literally answered your own question.Exactly. 16 trains and only 4/5 diagrams covered. It doesn't inspire confidence.
There are only 7 units required daily. (4x 2 cars, 3x 3 cars)Exactly. 16 trains and only 4/5 diagrams covered. It doesn't inspire confidence.
12 trains, currently. 4 aren't service ready yet. Those being: 175004 at Exeter, 175113 and 116 at Laira and 175010 at Penzance.Exactly. 16 trains and only 4/5 diagrams covered. It doesn't inspire confidence.
now it's engines failing.
Although, the heat probably doesn't help the units very much!
The frustrating and annoying thing, though, is that there was no need to rush them back into use. DfT knew that the short set HSTs would be going off-lease, and that the 175s were the only available replacement once it had been decided to abandon the 769/9s. Yet they still chose to park them in unsuitable open storage until the need was urgent.I'd give them a while longer before putting the units down as "bad"; you can't expect anything on the railway to work the moment you use them for the first time, that's just unrealistic, particularly as these trains were forcibly rushed back into usage with the pressure on GWR by the DFT to withdraw the HST fleet by the end of 2025 and couldn't be given the sufficient amount of TLC they needed.
Which is a ROSCO risk-based decision. If the most likely prospect was ‘cars to Newport’ then Ely made sense.It seems to me that when they were parked up a decision was made to do very little to them and if they were required again they would worry about that at that time.