Thames Valley Electrification (the facts and figures)

[anthony263]

Eight 165s could run the Cardiff - Portsmouth service, plus five for Cardiff - Taunton. Add on a few for the Weymouth/ service.

As 90mph units, I see them more as 158 replacements than Pacer replacements. I take it they are all 3/2 seating?

The only problem with operating the class 165/166's on the Cardiff - Taunton route is that i dont think the turbos will be able to be cleared to work into the platforms under the main roof at Bristol Temple meads . Finally will a class 165 fit on the line from Castle Cary to Weymouth?

 

[MCR247]

Eight 165s could run the Cardiff - Portsmouth service, plus five for Cardiff - Taunton. Add on a few for the Weymouth/ service.

As 90mph units, I see them more as 158 replacements than Pacer replacements. I take it they are all 3/2 seating?

I *think* they are all 3+2

 

[paulravuslante]

Eight 165s could run the Cardiff - Portsmouth service, plus five for Cardiff - Taunton. Add on a few for the Weymouth/ service.

As 90mph units, I see them more as 158 replacements than Pacer replacements. I take it they are all 3/2 seating?

Every 165 I've been on is 3+2 seating and I'm a regular on the Thames Valley stoppers.

Personally, I don't see the sense in replacing 158s with 165s. Seems a retrograde step when you consider that 158s have 2+2 seating, tables, accessible toilet (as well as a standard toilet on most units), air-con (if it stills works), vestibule doors, connecting corridors.

The 165s have more in common with Pacers (no air con, no connecting corridors, limited luggage space, no tables) so would be a good replacement for them, especially as 165s are newer and faster than Pacers.

 

[tbtc]

Every 165 I've been on is 3+2 seating and I'm a regular on the Thames Valley stoppers.

Personally, I don't see the sense in replacing 158s with 165s. Seems a retrograde step when you consider that 158s have 2+2 seating, tables, accessible toilet (as well as a standard toilet on most units), air-con (if it stills works), vestibule doors, connecting corridors.

The 165s have more in common with Pacers (no air con, no connecting corridors, limited luggage space, no tables) so would be a good replacement for them, especially as 165s are newer and faster than Pacers.

You don't need Pacer replacements to be "faster" though - the routes they operate on are relatively slow. The 165s seem better suited to longer distance work than branchlines

 

[PhilipW]

Going back to the original premise of this thread. The figures given say that the Thames Vally electrification will only free up about 20 of FGW's 57 sets of 165/166s.

I am not sure what exactly the writer is trying to imply - I read it that he is suggesting that the electrification is a waste of money. Really !!

 

[paulravuslante]

You don't need Pacer replacements to be "faster" though - the routes they operate on are relatively slow. The 165s seem better suited to longer distance work than branchlines

They're pretty much an all rounder down here in the Thames Valley, working some fast London - Oxford services, as well as all the little branch lines in between. They would indeed be suited for somewhere like Bristol, where they could replace a 158 and keep to time, or provide a slightly higher standard of accommodation than a pacer!

 

[route:oxford]

The 165s are alright, they'd be far better with "clubman" style seating though.

If you were a regular "Pacer" passenger, I'd doubt if you'd complain too much if a 165 turned up instead*.

*Other than that odd "nursing home" smell that they come with.

 

[geoffk]

Would Paddington - Bedwyn continue to be a diesel operation throughout, or you have Paddington - Newbury and a Newbury - Bedwyn shuttle?

Would make more sense to extend the wires to Bedwyn. Even better would have been to go on to Marlborough!

 

[swt_passenger]

Would Paddington - Bedwyn continue to be a diesel operation throughout, or you have Paddington - Newbury and a Newbury - Bedwyn shuttle?

Would make more sense to extend the wires to Bedwyn. Even better would have been to go on to Marlborough!

Following electrification and IEP the entire service could be different. The GWML RUS points out that there could be 2 tph on the B&H as far as Taunton, with one being a semifast stopper. So it could pick up the stops beyond Newbury quite easily.

The problem, it seems to me, is that people are trying to visualise the current service pattern being electrified, whereas with the electrification area as announced so far, services are just as likely to change...

 

[gallafent]

The 165s are alright, they'd be far better with "clubman" style seating though.

Agreed. The Chiltern 165s are hugely nicer to travel on - they seem like completely different trains! They have nicer seats, air conditioning and no opening windows!

And as for the ongoing "refurbishment" of the FGW 165s: new information indicators and automated announcements are fine, but the main change seems to be removing all the little coffee tables, meaning there's nowhere to put down a drink apart from on a seat or on the floor! Nice improvement!

Roll on 2013 (is it?) and Chiltern trains to Oxford.

 

[tbtc]

Roll on 2013 (is it?) and Chiltern trains to Oxford.

That's a point; hopefully the Chiltern extension will be up and running before the Thames Valley wiring disrupts the through service from London to Oxford (via Reading), meaning Oxford never loses a direct London service.