Heathrow Express GWR Contract

[coppercapped]

It seems quite bizarre that they are not keepong the 332s until at least the crossrail transition is complete.

If you read Mr. Yard's earlier post you must have understood that HS2 Ltd. needs to be able to start work on the Old Oak Common site by December 2019 at the latest if the HS2 construction schedules are to be met. The re-useable fittings and fixtures will have to be out of the building by that date.

This means that there will be no maintenance depot available for the Class 332s from a couple of months before that date and from that point onwards they will be no longer able to run in passenger service. You can then work backwards from this date (probably sometime about the end of October 2019) to work out when (a) re-training the drivers to handle the Class 387s will have to start and (b) the first of the re-fitted 387s will have to be in service.

These dates have nothing to do with the Crossrail transition but the rolling stock re-shuffles obviously have to take that transition into account as well.

 

[332 > 444]

That is an interesting comment. In what way does the 332 do a worse job than the 387 would?

332s are very slow off the mark compared to a 360 even also decelerate quite slowly too. No match for a 387 but an 8 car 387 will be much smaller than an 8 car 332 (160m vs 184) loads of space lost especially in a 200m+ platform.

 

[TEW]

But they aren't free when they get overhauled!
So the long suffering Thames Valley commuters will have to suffer old unreliable trains which are completely unsuitable for the Thames Valley.

It's like banging your head against a brick wall. It is only 12 out of 45 units that are needed for the HEX, and the period when Turbos return is only one timetable period. Frankly you will just have to deal with, it is not the end of the world, other areas get a far worse deal. The Turbos are hardly unsuitable for the Thames Valley anyway, it's what they have been doing for the last 25 years.

 

[HowardGWR]

On the actual subject, I suspect the Hex won't lose its pax completely because, like GTX, it is sold to unsuspecting foreign visitors. I remember visiting Rome and at Fiumicino, it was a devil of a job to find a cheap way of getting into Rome.

 

[MarkyT]

332s are very slow off the mark compared to a 360

The fairly sluggish acceleration (for an electric) of the 332 units fits well running among HSTs on the fasts (sorry, MAINS!) but I think they'll get in the way of 80xs on juice. 387s on the other hand probably match the Hitachis' performance more closely (up to their maximum 110mph clearly!).

 

[Mikey C]

On the actual subject, I suspect the Hex won't lose its pax completely because, like GTX, it is sold to unsuspecting foreign visitors. I remember visiting Rome and at Fiumicino, it was a devil of a job to find a cheap way of getting into Rome.

I imagine it will be difficult to miss the adverts for Crossrail at Heathrow, especially as most tourists will arrive with a tube map either in their guide book or as an app...

 

[cactustwirly]

It's like banging your head against a brick wall. It is only 12 out of 45 units that are needed for the HEX, and the period when Turbos return is only one timetable period. Frankly you will just have to deal with, it is not the end of the world, other areas get a far worse deal. The Turbos are hardly unsuitable for the Thames Valley anyway, it's what they have been doing for the last 25 years.

Which is over 1/4 of the fleet.
We've had 10 years of overcrowded trains, we were told that that once the railway was electrified we would get more seats. However the capacity is being removed at the expense of Heathrow passengers.
I was actually referring to the clapped out 769s which belong in the scrapyard

 

[Clarence Yard]

Which is over 1/4 of the fleet.
We've had 10 years of overcrowded trains, we were told that that once the railway was electrified we would get more seats. However the capacity is being removed at the expense of Heathrow passengers.
I was actually referring to the clapped out 769s which belong in the scrapyard

The 165/1 3 cars have (and 769 4 cars will have) about 50 more seats per unit than a 387. So actually it will be an uplift in capacity, whichever type gets used.

 

[cactustwirly]

The 165/1 3 cars have (and 769 4 cars will have) about 50 more seats per unit than a 387. So actually it will be an uplift in capacity, whichever type gets used.

But 12 X 3 car Turbos would need to be released to provide the same amount of capacity as the 387s.
Given the shortages at Reading atm, I can just see a lone 2 car 165 appearing on a busy peak time service.

 

[Non Multi]

I just hope that GWR gives passengers enough prior warning in the timetables and on station notices that certain trains are going to be Turbos again, so passengers have the choice to avoid those trains.

 

[Agent_Squash]

I just hope that GWR gives passengers enough prior warning in the timetables and on station notices that certain trains are going to be Turbos again, so passengers have the choice to avoid those trains.

And overcrowd the electrostar services?

 

[TEW]

Which is over 1/4 of the fleet.
We've had 10 years of overcrowded trains, we were told that that once the railway was electrified we would get more seats. However the capacity is being removed at the expense of Heathrow passengers.
I was actually referring to the clapped out 769s which belong in the scrapyard

You aren't even going to get 769s. The 769s will provide some welcome capacity increases on the routes off the mainline. They will certainly be very welcome on the North Downs replacing the current mix of 2 and 3 car Turbos. I don't know where the notion that they are clapped out has come from either. They are only around 5 years older than the Turbos they will replace.

You are going to get more capacity in the long term. You're getting a service completely transformed with 3 fleets of new trains, 80x trains, 387s and 345s. I doubt anyone has any sympathy for your whining that you will have to have a few Turbo workings for a few months. Not that all the Turbo workings have been replaced anyway.

 

[cactustwirly]

You aren't even going to get 769s. The 769s will provide some welcome capacity increases on the routes off the mainline. They will certainly be very welcome on the North Downs replacing the current mix of 2 and 3 car Turbos. I don't know where the notion that they are clapped out has come from either. They are only around 5 years older than the Turbos they will replace.

You are going to get more capacity in the long term. You're getting a service completely transformed with 3 fleets of new trains, 80x trains, 387s and 345s. I doubt anyone has any sympathy for your whining that you will have to have a few Turbo workings for a few months. Not that all the Turbo workings have been replaced anyway.

I'm not whining, I'm stating my opinion of why this whole thing is a really bad idea.

The 319s aren't particularly reliable and Reading barely has enough Turbo's to cover its diagrams (with daily shortforms)
I just know the 8 car 387s will be replaced with 2 car 165s on busy peak time services.
One of the reasons why they were replaced with 387s was because they didn't have enough capacity.
The diagrams will have to be rewritten to keep the turbos off the mains, since the peak time Didcot services are timed for 110mph.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Given how unreliable they are in adverse weather, perhaps not. Any hint of a snowflake and they just don't work.

Could be a maintenance issue, as I don't think the 333s overly suffered in the recent snow flurries we had...

Southern Jessies!

 

[Non Multi]

And overcrowd the electrostar services?

At least there is a bit more standing room on a 387, being 4 car sets.

 

[TEW]

I just know the 8 car 387s will be replaced with 2 car 165s on busy peak time services.
One of the reasons why they were replaced with 387s was because they didn't have enough capacity.
The diagrams will have to be rewritten to keep the turbos off the mains, since the peak time Didcot services are timed for 110mph.

I am sorry but you just don't know that. You are speculating, pure and simple. You don't have a clue what is going to happen. A 2 car 165 replacing an 8-car 387 seems incredibly unlikely to me.
Of course the diagrams will have to be rewritten, but that happens at most timetable change anyway. It's no great hardship. In the long term this is nothing but a positive change. If you have to put up with a few Turbos for a few months, oh well. Get over it. People all over the country get a far worse deal.

 

[Ianno87]

I imagine it will be difficult to miss the adverts for Crossrail at Heathrow, especially as most tourists will arrive with a tube map either in their guide book or as an app...

What adverts? Compare the waywinding today betwen Heathrow Express (huge signs/adverts bombarding you as soon as you step off the air bridge) vs. the tiny directions for the Piccadilly Line lost on the "standard" airport signage.

 

[cactustwirly]

I am sorry but you just don't know that. You are speculating, pure and simple. You don't have a clue what is going to happen. A 2 car 165 replacing an 8-car 387 seems incredibly unlikely to me.
Of course the diagrams will have to be rewritten, but that happens at most timetable change anyway. It's no great hardship. In the long term this is nothing but a positive change. If you have to put up with a few Turbos for a few months, oh well. Get over it. People all over the country get a far worse deal.

It's educated speculation based in the reliability of the 319s and the already stretched fleet of 165s at Reading, (which would already be more stretched covering for the failures of 769s and Thames Valley stoppers)
Really? So these people have to pay over £30 for the pleasure of not being able to board a train, because a shortformed turbo turns up instead of a 8 car 387, which is busy carting fresh air to Heathrow.

Before the 387s were introduced, GWR converted a lot of the Thames Valley stoppers to 2 car 165 diagrams, become of a shortage of 3 car 165s.
As I said the turbos would have to be at least 5 cars to provide sufficient peak time capacity.
Which is a significant proportion of the remaining Turbos at Reading.

You cannot expect a fleet of creaking 1980s EMUs at an unfamiliar depot to be reliable enough to release all these turbos.

 

[Non Multi]

I am sorry but you just don't know that. You are speculating, pure and simple. You don't have a clue what is going to happen. A 2 car 165 replacing an 8-car 387 seems incredibly unlikely to me...

You're not local then? Before January '18, the sight of a 2 car Turbo operating on the GW reliefs was not uncommon.

 

[Taunton]

I am sorry but you just don't know that. You are speculating, pure and simple. You don't have a clue what is going to happen. A 2 car 165 replacing an 8-car 387 seems incredibly unlikely to me.

A good number of us here have long experience on the Thames Valley, and sticking a 2-car 165 on a busy service, to the extent that passengers are physically unable to board, has a longstanding history. It has been denied (or not believed) here before by those who don't use the service. It's not as if the services as notably frequent either.

 

[cactustwirly]

A good number of us here have long experience on the Thames Valley, and sticking a 2-car 165 on a busy service, to the extent that passengers are physically unable to board, has a longstanding history. It has been denied (or not believed) here before by those who don't use the service. It's not as if the services as notably frequent either.

I remember about 5 years ago when a 2 car turbo operated a peak time service, many people at Maidenhead couldn't board.
It caused a large backlash in the local press.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Indeed. If you want to see three-coach (or at times two-coach) Turbos substituted for eight-coach trains, just go to the Cotswold Line: it's happening day in, day out right now.

 

[JonathanH]

Indeed. If you want to see three-coach (or at times two-coach) Turbos substituted for eight-coach trains, just go to the Cotswold Line: it's happening day in, day out right now.

That isn't because of a Turbo shortage though is it.

 

[Darandio]

That isn't because of a Turbo shortage though is it.

That isn't the point though, is it. It's the fact that some have regularly denied it even happens.

 

[Non Multi]

Indeed. If you want to see three-coach (or at times two-coach) Turbos substituted for eight-coach trains, just go to the Cotswold Line: it's happening day in, day out right now.

It's the railway equivalent of 'how many people can you can fit inside an Austin Mini?'

 

[Clarence Yard]

That isn't the point though, is it. It's the fact that some have regularly denied it even happens.

It’s been happening since they were first introduced as the Turbos have always been diagrammed to the max. If you take a 3 car out for a C4 or C6 you usually have to back fill with a 2 car.

In recent months, with up to 3 Turbos on mods or overhaul at any one time, 387 deliveries behind schedule, other 387 issues and difficulties with 800 set operation, the remaining Turbo Fleet has been at times well overstretched so you will have found a 2 car Turbo going out vice an 8 car 387. But that’s not a deliberate choice to hack off the punters, that’s just desperately trying to cover the service.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

This project has a similar scope for embarrassment as the Thameslink stock saga during its route upgrade and fleet replacement.
That sucked in other people's 377s, 387s and even 350s backfilling for 377s on other routes, before the 700s started arriving.
In the process it affected several other franchises as backfilling got more and more complicated with Siemens delays, not to mention Northern's 319 startup.
It also kick-started the orders for 387s which have now ended up with several other operators including GWR.
But at least Bombardier did well out of it.
All eyes will now be on how the 769 programme turns out, also the 345 rollout.
As if GWR didn't need another layer of complexity to cope with...

 

[JN114]

But substitutions are unit for unit - how many single 387s are there in the peak? Very few. It’s the 3 cars off the North Downs that are nominally being replaced.

4/769 vice 3/16x on North Downs
gives you:
6/16x vice 8/387 on Mainline

I concede the reliability of 769s is an unknown. But they’re effectively getting a major overhaul during the retractioning; Id hope that would greatly improve the reliability situation, subject to usual provisions of the bathtub curve.

I also disagree with the assertions that HEX will be carrying fresh air. While I concede I’ve been on many dead HEX services, I’ve also been on many HEX services that are incredibly busy - fully worth the 9 car formation; albeit perhaps not quite at the crush-loading levels one would get on a commuter service. 8/387 with a premium interior would be a good fit. Airport peak does not fit in with the normal peak patterns.

Operationally, HEX being brought under the GWR umbrella is a good thing. Certainly makes sense going forward if HEX’s track access isn’t indefinite. It’s one less operator to mess around with during disruption.

 

[cactustwirly]

I'm very sceptical about the reliability of the 769s having been thrashed at Thameslink and then put in cold storage for over a year.
Then coupled with an unfamiliar depot, I just don't see them being very reliable. Look at how reliable they've been for LM, and that's without the untested engines and cold storage.

The plan for 6*165 is good, but I can just foresee multiple 3 & 2*165s in the peak to cover for failed 769s.

 

[Taunton]

Regarding the HEx changes, I may have missed it above, but it was well understood that the 25 year contract for the 4 per hour on the Mains expires in 2023. I have not seen anything abouth this being altered. That has long been in the sights of both GW and Crossrail.