First Great Western

[Greenback]

Apparently it's got a large catchment area filled with important people. FGW were always very concerned about Pewsey passengers, Reading passnegers seemed to be considered far les simportant...

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Yes, the IC70 has a tendency to splinter into shrapnel in a crash

Then why not just make a shatterproof seat of the same shape and size of the IC70???

The FGW HST seats are too tall; that is the problem - it makes it look a lot more cluttered and cramped than it actually is. And oh yes - so the seats no longer shatter in a crash, so you now have a good chance of smashing your head on the rock solid extra tall seatback in front of you...

Is that really safer than the previous hazard? I think not...


One other thing about the refurbs - it is really neccessary for the lights to be so much brighter than before? It really is headache inducing! Given that most of the guards seem to use the lower setting I suspect they agree..?

 

[paulravuslante]

Have Turbos gone through an extensive refurbishment?

As a regular on the West London stoppers (I'm not an oik!) I've only seen a handful of Turbos with the refreshed interiors. I think it's still a work in progress, but if the quality of the refurbished interiors on this handful is anything to go by, they won't last for very long. Some lighting was already out and a window seal was hanging off one of the windows. The engine seemed to sound noisier as well. The refurb mainly involves replacement of seat covers / backs, repainting poles and handles etc and new flooring / panelling. Door buttons, seating layout and PIS system screens are exactly as they were before.

They should take a leaf out of SWT's book with their refurb of the 455s.

 

[sonic2009]

Apparently it's got a large catchment area filled with important people. FGW were always very concerned about Pewsey passengers, Reading passnegers seemed to be considered far les simportant...

could fgw not run the 165/166 extending them to westbury with nessecary upgrades ?? then pewsey would benefit for an hourly service

 

[Ivo]

could fgw not run the 165/166 extending them to westbury with nessecary upgrades ?? then pewsey would benefit for an hourly service

I don't believe they can at present; Walrus could clarify this. Bedwyn was always the extremity to my knowledge, but believe me - when we met, this was high on our agenda. Why not allow extended stoppers to Westbruy (even if it met reinstating the fourth platform)?

Pewsey itself is a minor settlement, which was reflected in NSE maps of old where it had a "limited service" circle. However, it does [sort of] serve Amesbury, Avebury, Devizes and Marlborough, all of which are isolated from the railway. The catch is that its poor service detracts custom from these towns; people from Marlborough for instance go to Bedwyn or Swindon.

It is, however, the closest any GW IC service will get to Salisbury Plain, and in fact Salisbury itself, so there is tourism potential there.

 

[Shaggy]

Speaking as someone who commutes daily from Hungerford into Paddington, I find some of the comments on here by what I irregular travelers on the route such as “the seat layout is a disgrace” and “the seats are too high” quite interesting.

I was a regularish (but leisure) passenger from Padd to Swansea before they did their upgrade and yes, three hours on a quiet off-peak service when you could commandeer a 4-seat table with great views was wonderful and I can still remember the disappointment when I first travelled on a refurbished carriage that I couldn’t still do that.

Now that I commute daily on the HSTs (about an hour or so each way) I can firmly say that the refurb is great. When I get on the train in the morning (call me anti-social), I don’t particularly want to look at other people or have other people staring at me or having their stuff in front of me. The new airline seats (which I don’t find at all uncomfortable) enable me to sit and read/work in peace and relative privacy as well as with the person next to me far more than the old layout would have.

I think it comes down to this. When I was a customer paying somewhere in the region of £200 per annum on Y-P returns to Swansea, I preferred the old layout. Now that I pay in the region of £4,500 per annum (including tube) I prefer the new layout.

 

[yorkie]

I think it comes down to this. When I was a customer paying somewhere in the region of £200 per annum on Y-P returns to Swansea, I preferred the old layout. Now that I pay in the region of £4,500 per annum (including tube) I prefer the new layout.

If you're going to bring costs into it, bear in mind that FGW will probably get less of your £4,500 (which will be shared with TfL etc) per mile than they got before, per mile, as Seasons are heavily discounted (I am not saying they shouldn't be).

 

[Shaggy]

If you're going to bring costs into it, bear in mind that FGW will probably get less of your £4,500 (which will be shared with TfL etc) per mile than they got before, per mile, as Seasons are heavily discounted (I am not saying they shouldn't be).

When still bearing that in mind, they will still get a fair whack of a chunk more from that £4,500 than £200.

 

[Going South]

The seats are not crammed in though; there is more legroom than before and also the tables on airline seats are actually able to accommodate laptops (even my widescreen laptop fits on). They are much more pleasant to travel in than previously.

I find I can't open my laptop up as fully as I would like and this will be a consideration when I next change computers. This is particularly troublesome in the "entertainment" carriage and I have learnt to try to avoid coach D when reserving a seat.
Other than that, I don't particularly have a problem with the high density seating, though if the price differential between standard and first is less than about £6 for an advance ticket when I book (London - Bath/Castle Cary), I opt for first.

 

[Mintona]

Much prefer sitting on a refurb HST than most other trains! As a tall person (6ft5in) I can actually fit in all the seats without having to sit sideways or bolt upright. I can only comfortably do this on refurb HSTs, 222s and 395s! EC/EMT (although I haven't been on their refurb yet) HSTs, MkIV sets, 150, 153, 156, 158, 170, 220/1, 390, no chance. So for this reason I rather like the refurb.

Plus I like the privacy. I hate sitting on an original MkIII seat coz you can't rest your head against anything and you can see everyone, and they can see you. Really dislike that. The lights are a bit bright though, my only gripe with them.

 

[MCR247]

The EMT refurb is more a refresh. They still have IC70s. Why do people like them, the bottom seat cushions just fall out

 

[Greenback]

Speaking as someone who commutes daily from Hungerford into Paddington, I find some of the comments on here by what I irregular travelers on the route such as “the seat layout is a disgrace” and “the seats are too high” quite interesting.

I was a regularish (but leisure) passenger from Padd to Swansea before they did their upgrade and yes, three hours on a quiet off-peak service when you could commandeer a 4-seat table with great views was wonderful and I can still remember the disappointment when I first travelled on a refurbished carriage that I couldn’t still do that.

Now that I commute daily on the HSTs (about an hour or so each way) I can firmly say that the refurb is great. When I get on the train in the morning (call me anti-social), I don’t particularly want to look at other people or have other people staring at me or having their stuff in front of me. The new airline seats (which I don’t find at all uncomfortable) enable me to sit and read/work in peace and relative privacy as well as with the person next to me far more than the old layout would have.

I think it comes down to this. When I was a customer paying somewhere in the region of £200 per annum on Y-P returns to Swansea, I preferred the old layout. Now that I pay in the region of £4,500 per annum (including tube) I prefer the new layout.

The HSt's were refurbished to benefit someone like yourself - the commuter travelling for an hour or less. They are certainly unpleasant to travel on for three hours these days, and I find them unbearable after that!

 

[Zoe]

The HSt's were refurbished to benefit someone like yourself - the commuter travelling for an hour or less. They are certainly unpleasant to travel on for three hours these days, and I find them unbearable after that!

The question is then, should the HSTs be used for commuter services? They were build as intercity express trains not commuter trains. I can't see Virgin running 390s on Euston to Northampton or East Coast using 225s for London to Peterborough.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Good frequencies? How about Pewsey-Padd? Didn't think so...

Iwas talking about the core Padd-Plymouth/Bristol/S Wales HST routes

 

[222666]

Apparently it's got a large catchment area filled with important people. FGW were always very concerned about Pewsey passengers, Reading passnegers seemed to be considered far les simportant...

Bingo, this must be why Cotswolds get trains longer than their stations, with plenty of carriages!

 

[Greenback]

The question is then, should the HSTs be used for commuter services? They were build as intercity express trains not commuter trains. I can't see Virgin running 390s on Euston to Northampton or East Coast using 225s for London to Peterborough.

In my opinion, no. HST's are wasted on short distance Oxford services. They were designed and built as long distance fasts ervice trains, and although I can accept that Bristol services are now more commuter in nature than express, they should be fitted out for, and concentrated on, the services to the South West, Bristol/Weston and South Wales.

Sadly, FGW has been far too keen to listen to the people of the Thames Valley (and Pewsey!) than their passengers in Wales (leave those chavs to ATW) and the South West (they'll have what we give them).

Bingo, this must be why Cotswolds get trains longer than their stations, with plenty of carriages!

There's gold in them there hills!

There used to be (still may be) a 1715 HST service from Pad, followed by a 1718 HST to Hereford. Both were first stop Reading IIRC, but there was hardly anyone on the Hereford compared with the 1715! Unless there was a huge Oxford-Worcester market, it always seemed quite a generous provision!

Something very similar used to happen an hour later as well!

 

[222666]

You know, I'd love it if Cotswolds became an extension of Evergreen 3 & ran into Marylebone instead. Run 168s only, not HST one minute & 165 the next.

Thoughts?

 

[Greenback]

Seems a reasonable idea to me! Chiltern seem a good TOC, they have a long franchise and will be serving Oxford...

 

[Ivo]

That would also allow a few extra paths out of Paddington That way the really busy routes could run every 15 minutes in the peaks.

 

[Class 33]

Franchise up for renewal in 2013. I think they'll get in again. I think First Great Western will just go on forever! What does everyone else think?

Overall they're not a bad train company. But I think it will be interesting and a refreshing change if another operator EVER takes over. All new liveries and it would be interesting if they changed the timetables around, introduced brand new services/routes, etc.

 

[The Planner]

You know, I'd love it if Cotswolds became an extension of Evergreen 3 & ran into Marylebone instead. Run 168s only, not HST one minute & 165 the next.Thoughts?

Nightmare, Oxford is a massive problem as it is with shunt moves at the north end that block the station for up to 4 or 5 minutes a time. The South bay is meant to fix the majority of that issue, but that is bound to go in the spending cuts.

EG3 is independent to the lines at Oxford so this wouldnt be possible unless you had access to the Chiltern platforms.

Why run just 168s on them ?? whats the difference between them and 166s apart from 90 vs 100mph top speed ?? Just get rid of the HSTs off there and keep it to one fleet.

 

[tbtc]

In my opinion, no. HST's are wasted on short distance Oxford services

I thought it was more about the capacity (since there are only really two trains an hour from Oxford) than the top speed

 

[222666]

Yeah sorry I meant Clubmans would be ideal. Also apologies this is a FGW thread not Chiltern!

Ofcourse not enough Clubmans if they're to do Oxford fasts & Birmingham. Just thinking out loud

 

[Ivo]

Oxford could make for a good 180 home

Fast and a decent capacity, all in one!

 

[Greenback]

I thought it was more about the capacity (since there are only really two trains an hour from Oxford) than the top speed

I don't know if it was capacity that caused them to be run to and from Oxford. If so, then I hope the overcrowding was worse than other places on the network where an HST would come in handy!

I just think it's a waste that such a train is deemed to be best used on a service that is only an hour or so.

 

[Royston Vasey]

I don't know if it was capacity that caused them to be run to and from Oxford. If so, then I hope the overcrowding was worse than other places on the network where an HST would come in handy!

I just think it's a waste that such a train is deemed to be best used on a service that is only an hour or so.

The capacity is certainly needed in the peaks, filled with passengers paying £46.70 for the privilege for the 1 hour journey, and the top speed is utilised once on the main line. Also the alternative is the 3+2 Turbos, which unlike 365s are not really suited to limited stop "high" speed runs into London.

In fact even the medium distance HST operated services outside the peaks (Bristol, Cheltenham etc as well as the Oxfords) get pretty full from Paddington throughout the evening, and remain so well beyond Reading. Many Oxford services are Turbos outside the peaks anyway.

Other TOCs are not clamouring for HSTs so its a pretty efficient use of the stock. I don't think it's a waste, although I accept that HSTs are vastly superior in capacity and comfort compared to most commuter stock around the country.

And good for FGW, given their previously appalling reputation, that they have leased or in some cases bought, and rebuilt what were tired or derelict power cars and transformed and boosted the capacity of some very tired coaching stock.

It's difficult to see how the stock could be used more efficiently. I'd say the length of journey is less important than suitability of capacity and ability to reach line speed, especially if that is 125. And you just don't need that many sets to do the long distance turns to the South West and Wales, so its hard to see what else they'd be doing!

As for capacity elsewhere, they are too long for most medium or long distance turns currently served by 158s, 170s etc, and would be even more wasted than they are now if not achieving anything near their top speed consistently. Liverpool-Norwich, Cardiff-Portsmouth for example. Arriva don't seem to want more HSTs for XC it would seem, one route where they probably would be well utilised.

 

[Stonesourscotty]

Imagine First Lose FGW on the next tender date? what happens to the HST's first own? could they take them with them to say TPE or a Open Access service using these hsts?

 

[455driver]

They take them with them.

 

[Greenback]

The capacity is certainly needed in the peaks, filled with passengers paying £46.70 for the privilege for the 1 hour journey, and the top speed is utilised once on the main line. Also the alternative is the 3+2 Turbos, which unlike 365s are not really suited to limited stop "high" speed runs into London.

In fact even the medium distance HST operated services outside the peaks (Bristol, Cheltenham etc as well as the Oxfords) get pretty full from Paddington throughout the evening, and remain so well beyond Reading. Many Oxford services are Turbos outside the peaks anyway.

Other TOCs are not clamouring for HSTs so its a pretty efficient use of the stock. I don't think it's a waste, although I accept that HSTs are vastly superior in capacity and comfort compared to most commuter stock around the country.

And good for FGW, given their previously appalling reputation, that they have leased or in some cases bought, and rebuilt what were tired or derelict power cars and transformed and boosted the capacity of some very tired coaching stock.

It's difficult to see how the stock could be used more efficiently. I'd say the length of journey is less important than suitability of capacity and ability to reach line speed, especially if that is 125. And you just don't need that many sets to do the long distance turns to the South West and Wales, so its hard to see what else they'd be doing!

As for capacity elsewhere, they are too long for most medium or long distance turns currently served by 158s, 170s etc, and would be even more wasted than they are now if not achieving anything near their top speed consistently. Liverpool-Norwich, Cardiff-Portsmouth for example. Arriva don't seem to want more HSTs for XC it would seem, one route where they probably would be well utilised.

I see what you are saying. It's justified on the grounds that there isn't anywhere else that FGW could be using them. I was thinking more nationally, though!

 

[Royston Vasey]

I see what you are saying. It's justified on the grounds that there isn't anywhere else that FGW could be using them. I was thinking more nationally, though!

I think it's more than that though, I can't think of many operators or routes nationally which would want or need additional 125 mph stock. None seem to be crying out for it.

- XC have a few HSTs and seem reluctant to use what they have
- East Coast would take a few more if they could perhaps, for Lincoln perhaps, or the forthcoming York stoppers (but they aren't long routes either)
- Virgin wouldn't take any as they'd be non-standard (hired-in EWS loco and a few coaches are much simpler for them to maintain)
- East Midlands might take a few to bolster their fleet, but don't seem to need many more
- Open access (existing or new) would take some I'm sure, but should be lower priority than a franchised TOC with crowded routes anyway.

In terms of routes, you'd definitely say their capacity could be used on the long distance XC services, Liverpool-Norwich, Birmingham - Stansted, Transpennine even, but their length makes many such routes and stations unsuited to them, and they may not reach 125 anyway. They aren't really intercity routes in the rail sense, more a succession of local services.

The problem lies in the HST not being that flexible as a unit, 2-4 car MUs can be split and joined as appropriate en route or to suit the time of day.

Other areas do need more capacity, but that is only workable is this is provided by additional short units rather than long IC units.