Should the GWR IET fleet be refurbished?

[Doctor Fegg]

I heard from a member of the catering crew on a GWR IET last week there is a refurbishment in the pipelines for the GWR IET fleet with potential buffets. Of course I pinched myself to check I wasn't dreaming but yeah, he did say this.....Yeah....yeah I know.

Mark Hopwood specifically said "we're not planning radical change in that area at this point in time" at a briefing yesterday, so colour me sceptical on that one.

 

[Snow1964]

I heard from a member of the catering crew on a GWR IET last week there is a refurbishment in the pipelines for the GWR IET fleet with potential buffets. Of course I pinched myself to check I wasn't dreaming but yeah, he did say this.....Yeah....yeah I know.

The term refurbishment is often misused to assume upgrades. Whereas it means to repair, restore, redecorate, and return to looking like new.

I think it will be case of wait and see if there are changes, or just returning to standard it used to be.

To some extent GWR catering is a mess, where a 2hour service from Cardiff to London gets it, but a 3 hour service from Cardiff to Portsmouth gets none. I guess any plans have to be consistent with what they intend to fit to any regional BEMUs replacing 158s and 166s (which are likely to be ordered within next 24 months) Otherwise will continue current farce of say trains running Bristol-Bath where some have catering and others dont, giving very inconsistent service level, and confusing customers as to what they can expect.

 

[tfw756rider]

The term refurbishment is often misused to assume upgrades. Whereas it means to repair, restore, redecorate, and return to looking like new.

I think it will be case of wait and see if there are changes, or just returning to standard it used to be.

Surely the seats would be upgraded at the very least as part of the refurbishment, to ones that wouldn't just collapse again in another few years.

 

[Mikey C]

The term refurbishment is often misused to assume upgrades. Whereas it means to repair, restore, redecorate, and return to looking like new.

As the seat cushions are collapsed, a basic refurbishment to return them to new would involve replacing them all...

 

[tfw756rider]

As the seat cushions are collapsed, a basic refurbishment to return them to new would involve replacing them all...

...but again, surely they'd just collapse again in a few years? It would make much more sense to put a longer lasting repair / modification to the seats into place, if not replacing them entirely.

 

[crablab]

It would make much more sense to put a longer lasting repair / modification to the seats into place, if not replacing them entirely.

Isn't that a commercial decision for the train supplier, Agility, based on how hard they feel they can sweat the assets within the contract?

 

[AndrewP]

My experience is not with rail contracts but property contracts but there are many similarities i.e. a big expensive asset that deteriorates over time whilst user expectations rise and those operating it wanting to, understandably, minimise their costs and maximise their profits.

Many of the issues I see are due to:

• Poorly written specifications and contracts where people interfere in areas they have no expertise e.g. lawyers trying to write technical requirements
• Poor performance management with either too many or unfocused performance measures - a small number with real impact please
• A contract written to promote an adversarial relationship whereas the ideal is that everyone benefits
• Nickel and diming suppliers when they need a fair return (but not excessive profits) otherwise what is the point for them

I could go on but with the IETs and Azumas (which I use a lot) they seem decent trains to me but will need a refurb soon

 

[HOOVER29]

My experience is not with rail contracts but property contracts but there are many similarities i.e. a big expensive asset that deteriorates over time whilst user expectations rise and those operating it wanting to, understandably, minimise their costs and maximise their profits.

Many of the issues I see are due to:

• Poorly written specifications and contracts where people interfere in areas they have no expertise e.g. lawyers trying to write technical requirements
• Poor performance management with either too many or unfocused performance measures - a small number with real impact please
• A contract written to promote an adversarial relationship whereas the ideal is that everyone benefits
• Nickel and diming suppliers when they need a fair return (but not excessive profits) otherwise what is the point for them

I could go on but with the IETs and Azumas (which I use a lot) they seem decent trains to me but will need a refurb soon

Was at Peterborough on Monday & while the Azuma’s looked good from a distance when they stopped by me on platform 4 they were anything but.
Paint decals & outside fittings all suffering

 

[Snow1964]

My experience is not with rail contracts but property contracts but there are many similarities i.e. a big expensive asset that deteriorates over time whilst user expectations rise and those operating it wanting to, understandably, minimise their costs and maximise their profits.

Many of the issues I see are due to:

• Poorly written specifications and contracts where people interfere in areas they have no expertise e.g. lawyers trying to write technical requirements
• Poor performance management with either too many or unfocused performance measures - a small number with real impact please
• A contract written to promote an adversarial relationship whereas the ideal is that everyone benefits
• Nickel and diming suppliers when they need a fair return (but not excessive profits) otherwise what is the point for them

I could go on but with the IETs and Azumas (which I use a lot) they seem decent trains to me but will need a refurb soon

I know exactly where you are coming from, staff on the ground are not trained to check things, so instead of a contract being delivered 100%, when one side skimps a bit (or if you prefer bends the boundaries of acceptable standards) nothing happens and over time the expectation moves.

Part of my career was in International oil shipping trading, and sending independent Inspectors in was normal to ensure no one would get lazy and not pump out a tank 100%, or check it was fully clean and dry before loading etc. Occasionally a second Inspector would be sent in unannounced and randomly just to make sure checking was being done.

The railway seems to operate to quite sloppy standards (if not deemed safety critical), it is not as if GWR occasionally send one of their internal auditors and member of in house legal team along with a driver to collect a train from a Hitachi depot in the morning (armed with camera, metal ruler, spirit level etc) Then they walk through looking for sagging seats, unrepaired decor etc and say not taking it as not at contract standard. So fix it to agreed standards.

Just doesn't happen with GWR, even if there is a contractual standard to be met. It happens in some other industries (as per my personal experience, with the random second Inspectors).

It's not like need to check every train leaving the depot, just a few spot inspections so other side knows they will be held to the detailed contractual spec. And if they did that, would they actually need to refurbish the IETs.

 

[AndrewP]

It's not like need to check every train leaving the depot, just a few spot inspections so other side knows they will be held to the detailed contractual spec. And if they did that, would they actually need to refurbish the IETs.

Totally agree - the percentage/ spot check is really powerful and should also be used to call out where someone is doing something good so if a train exceeds expectations credit can be given