Good to see 115 entrusted with the key passenger diagram.
Looks like 115 is going to operate 2C05 from Par now, assume something else might do the other bit from Exeter...
The thing is, it has to work, there is literally nothing else on the horizon. Some people will say about TfW 158's but they're a year away at least, they all need their air con replaced as it's basically non existent, along with various other refurbishment, new trains are probably 10 years away.
One of innumerable failures of the privatisation model which saw/sees stock owned by a third party go to poorly-managed storage rather than being transferred in a timely manner to the new operator. Time and time again it has been shown that storing stock is a poor option, yet it continues apace, with a lack of a strategic rolling stock plan.
Indeed. GW has already been burnt by the 769s, whilst other refurbishing fiascos were the 442s and 458s.
That’s nothing to do with who owns the stock and everything do with the dysfunctional DfT.
I'd disagree, whilst far from perfect, they're probably the best of the 158's still in service, I've probably had two sets over the past couple of months where all the air con has completely failed. The 166's on the other hand....
I know we’re digressing again, and by this point it’s probably worth spinning it out to a separate thread but my recent trips in Scotland had mixed results - Aircon on the excellent Inverness sets (701-725) worked perfectly and one was like a fridge, Aircon on the Corkerhill sets (726-741) very patchy with most not working.
*Someone* is paying for storage of the 769/9s, so *someone* must think that they have a possible future *somewhere*. Of course, they might or might not be right ...
Again though, they've been stored for years now and would require return to service work
I don't know, but the 769/9s are owned by Porterbrook, the bulk of which are stored in Porterbrook's own facilities in Long Marston. Not sure what money changed hands when DfT contracted GWR to lease the 769/9s, but when DfT instructed GWR to abandon the plans for 769s on the North Downs lines the revenue stream presumably dried up. AIUI a pair of 769/9s went to Scotland for a period, and a pair have been based at Leicester off and on for use by a FOC. The only significant development was 769922 being stored in Stoke and one car catching fire - presume that is now scrap.
But it was still well after dark at Plymouth!
Actually the 175 sat down at Bodmin with an F and R fault. So it was replaced by the 150 at Plymouth as it was faulty (surprise surprise).
Indeed - the system, not the individuals involved. You can't just store stock for ages and expect not to incur needless costs and delays as a result (and I'm not just referring to the 175s).
Amazingly, that was done when the 379s were stored at Worksop. They were taken over to Doncaster one or two at a time to juice up under the OLE, then returned to soggy old Worksop.
That surely depends entirely on the nature of the issue. People coming to something new will react differently to it from people who have been used to somethings foibles over 20 years. Doesn’t make either position necessarily “right”.
103 and 110 are both now in the GWR livery as far as I am aware, but yes both still in Wolverton. The last move down was 004 to Exeter back in June.
Costs money. ROSCOs will cut costs to the bone. It would be interesting to know what requirements are placed upon them regarding storage and subsequent suitability for passenger service. Of course as stock becomes ever more 'computer-complex' and thus delicate, longer-term storage becomes correspondingly problematic. In days of yore, if you stored, say, a 4SUB, it would still work years later!
Exactly!
And whether any money is changing hands until the trains are actually fit for service. If it is then someone should be looking for a new job.
