FGW Hire 159 for High Summer services?

[northernrailer]

I have been told that from 7th July the following services operated by FGW will be a SWT 159:

0723 Warminster - Gt Malvern
1050 Gt Malvern - Brighton
1659 Brighton to Bristol

Has anyone else heard this?

Apparently the unit comes of Salisbury depot early on a morning along with a SWT 158 that will work the Cheltenham to Swindon services.

 

[LBSCR Times]

Yes!
Advised 3 weeks ago by an FGW manager.

 

[swt_passenger]

A second hire in has been on the cards for quite a while, it was being discussed at the time the Melksham and Paignton enhancements were confirmed about 6 months ago, because DfT included an SWT unit in the rationale for those services. There was quite a discussion back then about whether this would be a second 158 or not, if it turns out to be a 159 that's even better for FGW.

Its availability now may be one of the planned changes (via internal cascade) of various extra EMUs being available to SWT.

 

[BestWestern]

Its availability now may be one of the planned changes (via internal cascade) of various extra EMUs being available to SWT.

In which case SWT need to be surrendering the set to one of the various less favoured TOCs who are desperately short of rolling stock! Completely unacceptable by any sensible standards to have various operators who struggle to muster stock to run the daily booked services while another has enough high quality units sitting about surplus that they can make a nice bit on the side (I presume?) by spot hiring several of them!

 

[swt_passenger]

In which case SWT need to be surrendering the set to one of the various less favoured TOCs who are desperately short of rolling stock...

How does anyone know they aren't planning to do that anyway? (With the proviso that there are already known strengthenings of various Salisbury line services anyway).

But why should every move of the odd unit have to generate Rosco press releases , pages of explanation in rail mags, and DfT announcements etc - after all, the DfT don't have anything to do with stock allocations...

 

[455driver]

after all, the DfT don't have anything to do with stock allocations...

I am soooo glad you put a smillie on the end of that!

 

[SansPareil]

Presumably commuter loadings decrease in the summer months, whereas on longer distance routes in tourist regions they increase. So perhaps this is just for the summer?

 

[starrymarkb]

Could it be planned to go on the West of England eventually with the hire being temporary between the unit being released and the resulting diagram shuffle on the WoE (especially if there are more diesel units to be released as more 458/5s are delivered)

Actaully I remember a big announcment a while ago about services on the WoE being strengthened from December as a result of the 10 car suburban line releasing 450s. Also hasn't the Ascot Guildford route gone over to 456s (again pending refurbishments and the 10 car program) meaning another possible 450 taking over a diesel over juicerail diagram

 

[swt_passenger]

The increases in various SWT services were to be 'by Dec 2014', but of course that date will probably move due to the late arrival of the 458/5s.

I've pulled the relevant DMU services out of the overall list here:

The following services to/from London Waterloo will be lengthened between March 2014 and December 2014
Mainline services:
0515 from Yeovil Junction (6 car to 9 car)
0543 from Salisbury (6 car to 9 car)
1620 to Exeter (6 car to 8 car)
1720 to Exeter (6 car to 9 car)
1750 to Exeter (6 car to 8 car)

 

[TEW]

SWT have mentioned trains that are strengthened from May here:
http://www.southwesttrains.co.uk/Pocket-timetables1405.aspx
It doesn't mention any DMU services.

 

[BestWestern]

In which case SWT need to be surrendering the set to one of the various less favoured TOCs who are desperately short of rolling stock...

How does anyone know they aren't planning to do that anyway? (With the proviso that there are already known strengthenings of various Salisbury line services anyway).

But why should every move of the odd unit have to generate Rosco press releases , pages of explanation in rail mags, and DfT announcements etc - after all, the DfT don't have anything to do with stock allocations...

One could reasonably draw the conclusion that SWT have a recent history of running ther DMU fleet at a surplus; FGW have been routinely using a 158 for several years now, and will continue to do so alongside the additional 159, and of course there have been numerous leases/loans/hires of units to EMT. Certain other TOCs would think it was Christmas if they found themselves with even enough available sets to fully honour their own commitments, let along have enough spares left over to go sending them on jollies all over the country!

 

[NX]

Nothing official to the crew who will be work in these units as yet. They only sign 158s, 159s will require a conversion course of some kind.

I'd have thought it will turn out as an additional 158 to go with the present one which is on hire.

NX

 

[PHILIPE]

The normal (FGW) Diagram is 3 Cars.

 

[TEW]

Nothing official to the crew who will be work in these units as yet. They only sign 158s, 159s will require a conversion course of some kind.

I'd have thought it will turn out as an additional 158 to go with the present one which is on hire.

NX

Other FGW crew have signed 159s in the past. FGW Penzance crews signed them to work the weekly SWT service to Penzance before it ceased operating. I can't imagine it would take long to train staff. AFAIK most of the differences between FGW and SWT 159s also exist between FGW 158s and SWT 158s, with the obvious exception of the third carriage.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Nothing official to the crew who will be work in these units as yet. They only sign 158s, 159s will require a conversion course of some kind.

I'd have thought it will turn out as an additional 158 to go with the present one which is on hire.

NX

Why would they require a conversion?

A 159 is a 3 car 158 that has been fitted out to SWT specification.

FGW already operate 3 car 158s, and are familiar with the SWT specification differences as they already spot hire an SWT 158.

 

[starrymarkb]

It's possible it could be a former TPX 159/1 (as FGW have a former TPX 3 car unit), I do recall there was an issue with FGW Crews and 159/0s in the later days of the Penzance service. All concerned had assumed a 158/159 had a common rating until something happened to an FGW crewed 159, things were looked into closer and it was found that they needed separate crew ratings (it was probably a paperwork issue rather then anything major) so after that the Penzance service was a 158)

 

[TEW]

The crewing of that Penzance service was encountering problems towards the end because of a general lack of crew knowledge at Penzance of 158s/159s. It had become the only booked 158/9 work for Penzance crew and there were crews who didn't sign either. 159s were used near enough up until the end of the service. I last had a 159 on the service in late August 2009 and the last run of the service altogether was in November. There may have been an issue during that period though. FGW have also hired in a 159 (or was it 2?) on one occasion since, for the Dawlish Air Show a couple of years ago. The 159(s) worked the booked LHCS diagrams so that the LHCS could work additional services for the air show.

 

[BestWestern]

The issue of crew competency will be dealt with by way of a simple briefing note, I would imagine. This was deemed sufficient to allow crews to work the hired 158 (as has already been pointed out, there are some fundamental differences between a 'native' FGW 158 and the SWT sets) and to cover the brief appearance of Reading-based 150/0 traction on West diagrams this easter. It has been specifically stated on internal notices that it is to be a 159 that will be hired. It is highly unlikely that would have been arranged if it meant additional staff training was required.

 

[windnoise69]

Penzance crews have lost competencey in 158s now so it would have to be placed on a diagram In the Bristol area with a select pool of drivers following a conversion course. From what I've heard there was a incident with a SWT 159 that was on hire to Fgw several years ago and have since banished the thought of giving then a 159

 

[NX]

No crew are current on 159s, hence some kind of conversion course would be required. Even if it was a one day course to ID the minor differences.

It wouldn't take long no, but they couldn't just step onto a 15 and off you go,

NX

 

[TEW]

As Best Western pointed out above it's unlikely to even be a 1 day course, much more likely just to be briefing note. There are more differences between an SWT and FGW 158 than there are between a SWT 158 and SWT 159, and FGW staff already crew a SWT 158 everyday. The 'conversion' from SWT to FGW 158 was, AFAIK, just done by a staff brief. I think it's incredibly unlikely FGW would hire a 159 if it was going to mean any significant expenditure of time or money to train staff. As I pointed out earlier, FGW previously hired a 159 for one day. I don't think there was any specific training just to allow the one day operation of a 159.

 

[NX]

The conversion for the SWT 158 and now the 150/0 was a self brief that's correct.

Guards would just have the same I assume, but drivers would need (I assume) a little more for the centre car MCBs etc. But saying that they have 158798 a true three car, which is more or less a 159 in all but class number, so maybe they wouldn't even require that.

Either way, I can't see a 159 being leased more likely just another one or two 158s.

NX

 

[TEW]

I've heard it from quite a few people now that it will be a 159. If it works the diagrams suggested in the first page it will have to be a 159 rather than a 158 as that's currently a 3-car 158 diagram. It's also one of the few diagrams that works for a SWT hire-in in terms of getting it to/from Salisbury Depot.

 

[NX]

Time will tell......

NX

 

[455driver]

Other FGW crew have signed 159s in the past. FGW Penzance crews signed them to work the weekly SWT service to Penzance before it ceased operating. I can't imagine it would take long to train staff. AFAIK most of the differences between FGW and SWT 159s also exist between FGW 158s and SWT 158s, with the obvious exception of the third carriage.

For the last couple of years that service was a 158 after a PNZ manager kicked up a stink about the crews only signing 158s.

It was a case of well they sign 158s so a 158 it must be even though the only difference from an SWT 158 and a SWT 159 is the centre coach, there are many more differences between a SWT 158 and an FGW 158 such as SDO and different air con systems meaning the FGW guards cannot reset it plus a few other things, but as the crews sign 158s there wasnt much the manger could do about it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Penzance crews have lost competencey in 158s now so it would have to be placed on a diagram In the Bristol area with a select pool of drivers following a conversion course. From what I've heard there was a incident with a SWT 159 that was on hire to Fgw several years ago and have since banished the thought of giving then a 159

Drivers at Westbury, Fratton and some Exeter* crews also sign 158s, I am not sure about the Conductors but would assume they are the same/ similar.

*It might just be the East links but I think it is all 5 top links which is most of the depot.

 

[thelongestroad]

159s are (from a train crew perspective) technically the same as the 158s. There are a few differences (CIS etc) but the units are considered the same type rating wise.

 

[TEW]

For the last couple of years that service was a 158 after a PNZ manager kicked up a stink about the crews only signing 158s.

It was a case of well they sign 158s so a 158 it must be even though the only difference from an SWT 158 and a SWT 159 is the centre coach, there are many more differences between a SWT 158 and an FGW 158 such as SDO and different air con systems meaning the FGW guards cannot reset it plus a few other things, but as the crews sign 158s there wasnt much the manger could do about it.

It definitely wasn't the last few years that it was a 158. The last 159 that I had on the service was August 2009, and it finished in November 2009. I don't think any more 159s ran it after August, so if a manager did kick up a fuss it was only a couple of months before it finished. As I've said before too FGW have hired in a 159 since then for what were normally the LHCS diagrams on the Taunton-Cardiff route.

 

[455driver]

I defer to your better recall, I know it was all 158s at the end, I thought it was longer than it actually was!

 

[thelongestroad]

there are many more differences between a SWT 158 and an FGW 158 such as SDO and different air con systems meaning the FGW guards cannot reset it plus a few other things, but as the crews sign 158s there wasnt much the manger could do about it.

Wouldn't know how to reset the air con in the FGW 158s, let alone the SWT system! And obviously we don't touch the SDO, don't even know how it works.

 

[PHILIPE]

For the last couple of years that service was a 158 after a PNZ manager kicked up a stink about the crews only signing 158s.

It was a case of well they sign 158s so a 158 it must be even though the only difference from an SWT 158 and a SWT 159 is the centre coach, there are many more differences between a SWT 158 and an FGW 158 such as SDO and different air con systems meaning the FGW guards cannot reset it plus a few other things, but as the crews sign 158s there wasnt much the manger could do about it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Drivers at Westbury, Fratton and some Exeter* crews also sign 158s, I am not sure about the Conductors but would assume they are the same/ similar.

*It might just be the East links but I think it is all 5 top links which is most of the depot.

Bristol and Gloucester also.