Sunset route
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2015
- Messages
- 1,223
I've got to agree, oh the paradox, the brand new and still being delivered trains get the old logo, the older trains that are getting replaced get the new logo.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Thameslink/ Class 700 Progress
- Thread starter fgwrich
- Start date
- Status
I've got to agree, oh the paradox, the brand new and still being delivered trains get the old logo, the older trains that are getting replaced get the new logo.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
The logo designer isn't relevant. The designer does a logo and gets paid. While some agencies may do the whole lot for you - logo design and implementing the changes - I suspect GTR is doing the logo stuff itself. Adding it to posters as and when, and planning at some stage to introduce the new logo elsewhere.
I guess by December 2018, the logo will be fully in place. But you'd then wonder why they showed the logo off now, and started using it online, before the whole Thameslink project was finished.
Anyway, it is what it is. The point remains though; did GTR need to change the logo and create an additional headache for a contract that hasn't exactly worked out well for them?
And on the same basis, will Great Northern also get a new logo soon?
I guess by December 2018, the logo will be fully in place. But you'd then wonder why they showed the logo off now, and started using it online, before the whole Thameslink project was finished.
Anyway, it is what it is. The point remains though; did GTR need to change the logo and create an additional headache for a contract that hasn't exactly worked out well for them?
And on the same basis, will Great Northern also get a new logo soon?
adrock1976
Established Member
Many thanks for posting the diagrams.
On another point, could you please explain RLU and FLU, as they are acronyms and are not supposed to be used without first saying what they mean?
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
No, it's just an 8 car one whether it's in an 8 car diagram or if it's landed in a 12 car diagram.
They have different stopping positions at some stations.
OFFDN
Member
TB4XX are RLU (8 car) diagrams and TB5XX are FLU (12 car) diagrams.
Class377/5
Established Member
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2010
- Messages
- 5,594
GTR didn't sign the contract, FCC did, GTR had to agree to whatever the terms are so its a fact that GTR didn't suffer the contract. Im having a hard time working out why people seem to have the knifes out for GTR over a FCC/DfT contract. The current logos on the units were done outside the contract by Siemens.
Seems this forum cannot be objective or allow the facts when it doesn't suit personal feeling (regardless of whether those feeling are valid or not). And I bet this is seen as supporting GTR when its simply pointing out this forums ability to change the truth to suit its own desires. And yes it annoys me that people on here continue to post complete crap then get arsey when they are shown to be wrong.
Class377/5
Established Member
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2010
- Messages
- 5,594
Where the paradox?
700 viyals order in 2014.
377/5 new viyals order in 2015 (and not actually arrived in time for the first unit either)
Hence the different.
Failed Unit
Established Member
I don't see where the poster is proved to be wrong? The fact is that GTR don't need to change the logo. As you said in your own post it is not important so leave the rebranding until the passengers see some improvement even if this doesn't happen until 2018. At the moment all 3 parts of the franchise are rock bottom in terms of performance. I am looking forward to 700s hitting great northern. That is an improvement over the 387s. But as you freely admit yourself the company / DFT / whoever else shouldn't be wasting time and money on rebranding - they should be focusing on improving a dire situation in terms of a poorly performing franchise.
Class377/5
Established Member
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2010
- Messages
- 5,594
The wrong part would be GTR stuffed the contract on something they didn't sign.
But yes there is many things far more important than what logo is outside the train as we have said. Right now performance is the focus. And that needs to be the number one priority not nice to haves.
Failed Unit
Established Member
Ok. But couldn't agree more on the last part. Get the performance to a level to be proud of and then rebrand. If anyone suggest repainting 313s the also need to think why. (Not that i have seen it suggested)
I don't see the harm discussing and giving opinions on the logo here, which is very much part of both the 700s and GTR in general.
It doesn't mean I go to bed at night worrying about it, or that it somehow stops other things being talked about and considered more important in the grand scheme of things.
I read in Rail Magazine that Great Northern's overall passenger satisfaction score in the National Rail Passenger Survey fell from 79% to 64%. I wouldn't mind betting that the 79% scored in 2015 was down on that achieved by FCC in their last year of operation.
Shows how bad things have fallen under GTR on Great Northern. They can't blame London Bridge redevelopment, DOO disputes or the introduction of new trains (doubt there was any significant 387 operation when the survey was done).
I see the handrails on the stairs at Stevenage station have been painted 'Connex yellow' - seems an appropriate choice of colour!
Shows how bad things have fallen under GTR on Great Northern. They can't blame London Bridge redevelopment, DOO disputes or the introduction of new trains (doubt there was any significant 387 operation when the survey was done).
I see the handrails on the stairs at Stevenage station have been painted 'Connex yellow' - seems an appropriate choice of colour!
Apart from the problems with the overheads (vastly improved after many years of upgrade work that caused a lot of heartache over weekends for years), and suicides, there hasn't really been any major problems on GN for years. Wagn and FCC each ran things pretty well, and even the Sunday working issues weren't until the latter half of First's tenure and possibly down to the attempts to harmonise working arrangements between TL or GN?
GN almost seemed as safe as c2c in terms of punctuality and clearly GNER and subsequent operators also have a fairly easy ride.
More recently the issues with driver shortages on GN has been so regular that I don't even risk travel unless absolutely necessary at weekends, and feel uncomfortable making plans in the week as it's always a bit of a gamble.
How did become like this? A route with a reliable fleet of trains, a well thought out timetable for the most part (gradual improvements and tweaks over the years to optimise it) and capacity upgrades.
Now people are on more cramped trains than they had before and can't be sure of a train even running.
GN almost seemed as safe as c2c in terms of punctuality and clearly GNER and subsequent operators also have a fairly easy ride.
More recently the issues with driver shortages on GN has been so regular that I don't even risk travel unless absolutely necessary at weekends, and feel uncomfortable making plans in the week as it's always a bit of a gamble.
How did become like this? A route with a reliable fleet of trains, a well thought out timetable for the most part (gradual improvements and tweaks over the years to optimise it) and capacity upgrades.
Now people are on more cramped trains than they had before and can't be sure of a train even running.
Last edited:
On TL, FCC were partly to blame for at least the first year of GTR. It was commonly believe that FCC had ceased to keep up maintenance in the closing months of the contract - so GTR inherited problem trains. And huge number of drivers that GTR felt it needed to recruit is very well documented. At least some of that applies to GN as well?
Units at Bedford this morning in case it is helpful
Bedford Carriage Sidings starting from running line and going east
377510+377207
700018
700036
700014
319372
377213+another 377 (516?)
700009
Empty
319445+another 319
700005
387118+another 387 (105?)
700002
Checking RTT suggests that more units will come out of Bedford Carriage Sidings but there are no workings from Jowett Sidings until late evening.
Jowett sidings
700107
700111
700106
700112
700101
Bedford to St Albans shuttles in the hands of 319439 and 377s.
8-car 700 at Blackfriars overnight was 700015 - should have worked 2W11 0652 London Blackfriars to Brighton
8-car 700 at Brighton was 700016 as that worked 2W79 2240 Bedford to Brighton last night. RTT appears to suggest that berthed in platform 5 overnight and would therefore be working 2W16 0804 Brighton to Bedford this morning.
And at Cricklewood 700007, 700020, 700006, 700019
Bedford Carriage Sidings starting from running line and going east
377510+377207
700018
700036
700014
319372
377213+another 377 (516?)
700009
Empty
319445+another 319
700005
387118+another 387 (105?)
700002
Checking RTT suggests that more units will come out of Bedford Carriage Sidings but there are no workings from Jowett Sidings until late evening.
Jowett sidings
700107
700111
700106
700112
700101
Bedford to St Albans shuttles in the hands of 319439 and 377s.
8-car 700 at Blackfriars overnight was 700015 - should have worked 2W11 0652 London Blackfriars to Brighton
8-car 700 at Brighton was 700016 as that worked 2W79 2240 Bedford to Brighton last night. RTT appears to suggest that berthed in platform 5 overnight and would therefore be working 2W16 0804 Brighton to Bedford this morning.
And at Cricklewood 700007, 700020, 700006, 700019
Last edited:
GTR took over from FCC in September 2014. It's now February 2017 - whatever 'issues' GTR inherited from FCC should have been long dealt with by now.
asylumxl
Established Member
I remember and used GoVia's first attempt at running Thameslink. I expected more of the same and was not proven wrong. That's all I have to say on that matter.
Hear hear.
Last edited:
I would agree that each TOC should get maybe a year or so 'grace' to fix issues discovered from the outgoing operator. When GTR took over and realised there weren't enough drivers, they should have fixed it straight away.
bramling
Veteran Member
So what a surprise, I'm not the only person to find the GN service has moved *backwards*.
Yep, sums things up really.
Perhaps the DfT should have quality measures in place and see to it that operators stick to them? I'd include headcount, operator-specific cancellations, punctuality, cleanliness and more in that.
Class377/5
Established Member
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2010
- Messages
- 5,594
Repeating the lie that FCC didn't maintain trains properly is silly. There was no change from the exam schedule that happened under FCC and into GTR. So no GTR didn't inherit problems trains. This is a point I'm sick of making as someone suggested it and it seems to have been taken as fact. The trains atre still maintain to the same standards.
And as for drivers, don't forget it takes atleast two years from a company coming in and wanting more drivers until those drivers are actually front line.it can take six months to actually find the people you want for drivers before even getting a course set up for them. Said courses last 12-18 months depending on what route knowledge, trains they I'll drive etc etc.
And that's without the truth that the training schools are working flat out wih all existing drivers who are required to learning multiple new stocks coming in.
Last edited:
OFFDN
Member
Let's just say that the information in the public domain isn't the full story.
Alas, this is straying from the topic at hand.
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
If you mean them taking on the drivers DB Cargo recently made redundant, the document was posted on Twitter the other day.
Getting back on topic, I understand 700 025 to be the next delivery as it has been reported as having been seen in France?
Yes...but you were the one that mentioned their 2015 score (probably) being down on FCC. The 2015 score will reflect what they inherited...
jon - I don't think it's possible to instantly train drivers though
GTR were clear about the lack of drivers and the need to recruit and train very early on in their franchise.class377/5 - I had the grace to say 'commonly believed'. As a passenger, the service markedly deteriorated in the last few months with significantly more trains that I used being out for repairs than was typical for year or so before of the franchise period. That period included one of my top 5 worst journeys (it took three trains to get home as two were taken out of service due to breaking)
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
...and I gather it has been delivered overnight to Three Bridges.
No it goes back far further. For example Southern 3 years before the next franchise was due to start going to see DfT to tell them they need to fund massive driver recruitment and programme on the existing FCC and Southern franchises including increasing the scale of the driver training set up to cope with the scale of the task needed (the bottleneck 377/5 has pointed out especially with all the new stock and cascades). Govia there for have very good evidence that DfT goofed up very early on and DfT probably don't want this to surface. This isn't the only example either.
The driver numbers on FCC dropped faster after bid submission date than before which would have left all the bidders with a bigger issue to solve on driver training than DfT anticipated.
Last edited:
- Status