ATW lack of Class 175 first class seating

[tbtc]

Rhydgaled has proposed that Swansea to Cardiff be served by two fast trains an hour (1 HST and 1 from Manchester) and the two hourly Swanline trains which stop everywhere. There is no loss of service provision in that compared to what we have now.

There is a market between Gowerton and Caridff. I know of several Gowerton passengers who commute to Cardiff daily. The question is, how will a change at Swansea affect them? It may not be a much longer journey given that trains reverse at Swansea anyway, but will the psychological impact of having an interrupted journey count against it?

As Rhydgaled proposes an hourly service from Swansea to Carmarthen, extending to other destinations, the question there is whether the timings will be competitive with bus or car, given the all stops nature of the service. However, the market between Swansea and stations to Carmarthen may not be particularly time sensitive.

Personally, I don't think that the proposals are practical, but I can see the appeal for a faster journey to and from Cardiff, as long as current service levels through Swansea were maintained.

Fair enough.

As the post said "having all Cardiff - West Wales direct trains routed via the district line", that suggested to me diverting the existing ones.

If you are going to run additional Cardiff - Swansea and additional Swansea - West Wales services then the points I make are answered. However whether this is the best use of additional stock is another question (given the crowded Valley services etc).

It wouldn't surprise me for the WAG to want to beef up rural services (North Wales improvements, Fishguard etc) at the expense of the busiest lines though...

 

[Greenback]

If you are going to run additional Cardiff - Swansea and additional Swansea - West Wales services then the points I make are answered. However whether this is the best use of additional stock is another question (given the crowded Valley services etc).

That's the practical side I was thinking of!

It wouldn't surprise me for the WAG to want to beef up rural services (North Wales improvements, Fishguard etc) at the expense of the busiest lines though...

The signs are that the current WG are more likely to want to provide better services in the traditional Labour supported areas, like the Valleys, at the expense of the rural areas that were more attractive to their former coalition partners!

 

[tbtc]

The signs are that the current WG are more likely to want to provide better services in the traditional Labour supported areas, like the Valleys, at the expense of the rural areas that were more attractive to their former coalition partners!

It'll be interesting to see how this pans out.

There are always political conspiracies about what one party choses to invest in (I've heard people complain that the Tories only electrification in Scotland during the 1980s was to Ayr because that was one of the few Conservative areas)... then again under the Conservatives we had things like the Sheffield Supertram (not known for being a Tory heartland round here!). People always find "facts" to fit the opinions they already had.

Realistically its time to invest in the Valley lines now - partly because of Pacer replacement, partly because the intensive service on a fairly self-contained set of lines lends itself to transformation like electrification, partly because the modern stock (175s) and much significant investment (ERTMS on the Cambrian) have happened in quieter parts of Wales.

 

[Greenback]

It'll be interesting to see how this pans out.

There are always political conspiracies about what one party choses to invest in (I've heard people complain that the Tories only electrification in Scotland during the 1980s was to Ayr because that was one of the few Conservative areas)... then again under the Conservatives we had things like the Sheffield Supertram (not known for being a Tory heartland round here!). People always find "facts" to fit the opinions they already had.

Realistically its time to invest in the Valley lines now - partly because of Pacer replacement, partly because the intensive service on a fairly self-contained set of lines lends itself to transformation like electrification, partly because the modern stock (175s) and much significant investment (ERTMS on the Cambrian) have happened in quieter parts of Wales.

The Valleys do need more investment, but there will naturally be political spin put on any announcements by the opposition. There's no doubt that places like Aberdare and the Rhondda Valley are far more likely to vote Labour than rural pembrokeshire or Gwynedd, who are LD or Plaid in their voting habits!

At the end of the day, fear of being criticised for helping 'their own areas' should not be a factor in any decision with regard to investment in better services for Valley lines.

 

[Chapeltom]

On the few times I've riden on Class 175s I've found them to be very comfortable and reliable. I used them a few times on a Cheshire Day Ranger on Saturday, Manchester Picc to Chester, Crewe to Whitchurch then from Crewe back to Stockport. Compared to the Voyager I took from Chester to Crewe, they are a different class of train. Plenty of legroom on them with plenty of windows to look out of. I took the 0850 from Manchester Picc down to Runcorn East and it was 3 car and it was easy to see why as it got busy by Warrington BQ with walkers headed to Wales and just general travellers. The 1233 I took from RUE onwards to Chester was also heaving.

Comedy moment was a 153 from Whitchurch to Crewe, I've never actually been on a single 153, only a 153 doubled up with a 150/155/156!

 

[Gareth Marston]

As a frequent business traveler on them the lack of tables and a tendency of the air con to think its a freezer are my only real gripes apart from the formations being too short. Knowing where the Stop signs are I always try and board ahead of the masses.

Realistically the 27 examples ATW are all we'll ever see of this design.

 

[IanXC]

Probably down to them being split up. It's only fairly recently that the different 180 operators started working with each other with regards to maintenance. If FGW take on the 5 x 180s I can't see the reliability of those 5 improving at all, while if TPE take them on and work with Hull Trains on maintenance there could be some improvements.

The FGW 5 and HT 4 will all be maintained at Old Oak Common though, so I would expect the opposite to be true.

 

[Rhydgaled]

There is a market between Gowerton and Caridff. I know of several Gowerton passengers who commute to Cardiff daily. The question is, how will a change at Swansea affect them?

Spot on, that is the question I was asking, plus how a change at Swansea would affect west Wales to Neath passengers.

As Rhydgaled proposes an hourly service from Swansea to Carmarthen, extending to other destinations, the question there is whether the timings will be competitive with bus or car, given the all stops nature of the service. However, the market between Swansea and stations to Carmarthen may not be particularly time sensitive.

I proposed more than that, possibly as many as 2 trains an hour Swasnea to Carmarthen. Of those, only 1 train per hour would call at Kidwelly, Ferryside and possibly Gowerton.

As the post said "having all Cardiff - West Wales direct trains routed via the district line", that suggested to me diverting the existing ones.

If you are going to run additional Cardiff - Swansea and additional Swansea - West Wales services then the points I make are answered. However whether this is the best use of additional stock is another question (given the crowded Valley services etc).

It wouldn't surprise me for the WAG to want to beef up rural services (North Wales improvements, Fishguard etc) at the expense of the busiest lines though...

I agree ValleyLines (incorporating Swansea - Cardiff) electrification comes first. Also my suggestion of terminating anything that goes into Swansea there allows longer trains on the busier Manchester - Swansea services than could be justified if they continue into west Wales. West Wales would then mainly be served by two car units (158s and 150s, but perhaps with 175s (maybe 3-car in the peeks) on Swansea - Carmarthen runs). You'd need to find the 158s of course, but perhaps that would allow some 3-car 175s to be reduced to 2-car and others extended to 4-car, then you could run Manchester - Swansea with a mix of 4-car 175s and 4/5-car LHCS.

I've been suggesting the following services arriving in Carmarthen for a while:

• 1tph fast from somewhere like Manchester
• 1tph slow from Swansea
• 1tph fast from Cardiff (via district line)

The question I'm asking in this thread is whether the fast from somewhere like Manchester should be split into two seperate services at Swansea. If this service comes from further east you force a compromise on train length (needing more coaches east of Swansea than west thereof) but if you split it west Wales to Neath and Gowerton to Cardiff require a change of train.

 

[Philip]

Also not place to complain really with 175's as they are on Manchester-Cardiff's - especially when there are 3-car 185's with less seats working Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds services at rush hour times.

 

[Greenback]

Spot on, that is the question I was asking, plus how a change at Swansea would affect west Wales to Neath passengers.

Some people don't mind changing, others find it a huge disincentive to travelling by train. For what it's worth, none of the Gowerton to Cardiff passengers seem to have mobility problems, most appear to be young and fit. So it depends on how they would view any disruption to their journey, particularly in terms of whether they do any work on the way,

I proposed more than that, possibly as many as 2 trains an hour Swasnea to Carmarthen. Of those, only 1 train per hour would call at Kidwelly, Ferryside and possibly Gowerton.

Apologies. I sometimes have difficulty in following the proposals, particularly in different threads!

I think Goerton deserves more than a hourly service. It is a natural railhead for North Gower, Gorseinon, Loughor and parts of West Swansea. Ther eis potential to increase the car parking there, and I think many people would be attracted to the train if a frequent service was provided.

I agree ValleyLines (incorporating Swansea - Cardiff) electrification comes first. Also my suggestion of terminating anything that goes into Swansea there allows longer trains on the busier Manchester - Swansea services than could be justified if they continue into west Wales. West Wales would then mainly be served by two car units (158s and 150s, but perhaps with 175s (maybe 3-car in the peeks) on Swansea - Carmarthen runs). You'd need to find the 158s of course, but perhaps that would allow some 3-car 175s to be reduced to 2-car and others extended to 4-car, then you could run Manchester - Swansea with a mix of 4-car 175s and 4/5-car LHCS.

I've been suggesting the following services arriving in Carmarthen for a while:

• 1tph fast from somewhere like Manchester
• 1tph slow from Swansea
• 1tph fast from Cardiff (via district line)

• 
  
  This is where I get confused! Does that mean one fast via Swansea, and one slow? One of which is actually from further afield?
  
  

  The question I'm asking in this thread is whether the fast from somewhere like Manchester should be split into two seperate services at Swansea. If this service comes from further east you force a compromise on train length (needing more coaches east of Swansea than west thereof) but if you split it west Wales to Neath and Gowerton to Cardiff require a change of train.

  
  The main problem is that trains to Carmarthen justify more than two carriages, but those that go further west seem to carry fewer passengers. Then of course there is the increase in demand for places like Tenby during holdiay periods.
  
  Increased service levels may be the answer, but there would undoubtedly continue to be peaks and troughs in demand. I'm still unsure that the infrastructure would eb able to cope with additional services, given that trains would have to be at particular points at certain times for passing or pathing purposes.

 

[anthony263]

Goweerton should be served by an hourly service between Milford haven & Manchester with an additional hourly stopping train to Carmarthen with 1 train every 2 hours continuing to Pembroke Dock & Fishguard Hbr. There could also be 7 trains daily between Swansea & Shrewsbury/Crewe (basically a train every 2 hours) which could also provide additional services at Gowerton.

I also suggest extending the Nottingham - Cardiff services through to Carmarthen via the Swansea district line with new stations at Llandarcy, Morriston & Grovesend. This also helps reduce the number of trains terminating at Cardiff central and could help reduce overcrowding on trains from Swansea as a lot of people would travel by train from their local stations at Morriston etc.

Its a pity that a tram route could be opened running from Swansea city centre via Killay, Gowerton & Gorseinon to Grovesend where passengers could connect with express trains to/from west wales or Cardiff.

Another idea would be to re-open the Pontyclun - Beddau line as a light rail route which could help to further increase passenger numbers using Pontyclun station.

 

[jones_bangor]

The main problem is that trains to Carmarthen justify more than two carriages, but those that go further west seem to carry fewer passengers. Then of course there is the increase in demand for places like Tenby during holdiay periods.

How about a 158-153 combo, with the 153 continuing west?

 

[Greenback]

That might be workable!

 

[Rhydgaled]

How about a 158-153 combo, with the 153 continuing west?

It'd have to be a 90mph capable 153 or the 158 would then be unable to make use of the greater than 75mph linespeeds between Swansea and Cardiff. I doubt a 75mph unit would manage CDF - Llanelli in an hour without passing non-stop through Port Talbot and Bridgend.

This is where I get confused! Does that mean one fast via Swansea, and one slow? One of which is actually from further afield?

I've attached the idea in diagramatical form, I hope you can now see what I'm getting at. I tried doing it in timetable form, but then it doesn't work out nicely, didn't really allow for a half-hourly service at Whitland and an hourly one at Milford Haven because of the different points of the hour you then have to run the trains. A re-think might be needed I think. Any ideas?

I've also left the Manchester (light green on the diagram) as through to Carmarthen, whether it'd be better run seperatly (and therefore making the line on the diagram between Swansea and Carmarthen red instead of light green) or not is still up for debate.

One final note, ideally the Fishguard/Milford Haven district line trains would run through to Portsmouth Harbour as it says on the diagram (1x 158 west of Cardiff or Carmarthen, 2x 158 on the east side). Realisticly though there won't be enough 158s available to do that for a long, long time, if ever, so it'll just have to be 1x 158 between Cardiff and the west (and it'd still be hard to get hold of enough 158s, I guess fewer 175s are required this way so they could be swapped for some 158s).

Rolling stock would therefore be:

• Blue service - 158
• Light green service - LHCS/175 (if split at Swansea, 175 between there and Carmarthen and LHCS between there and Manchester)
• Dark green service - Intercity 125 (hopefully Swansea will be electrified so then it'd be an Intercity 225 instead)
• Black service - 150/153
• Purple, Grey and Yellow services - Hopefully electrified, so class 377
• Orange service (HOWL), no idea if a 150, 153 or 156 is the best option, or how to provide a suitable service on that line

 

[Greenback]

It'd have to be a 90mph capable 153 or the 158 would then be unable to make use of the greater than 75mph linespeeds between Swansea and Cardiff. I doubt a 75mph unit would manage CDF - Llanelli in an hour without passing non-stop through Port Talbot and Bridgend.

I've attached the idea in diagramatical form, I hope you can now see what I'm getting at. I tried doing it in timetable form, but then it doesn't work out nicely, didn't really allow for a half-hourly service at Whitland and an hourly one at Milford Haven because of the different points of the hour you then have to run the trains. A re-think might be needed I think. Any ideas?

Yes, I see what you're geting at. It's difficult to timetable it though, as you say, and that's without thinking about platform considerations, or how the trains to further afield would have to fit in with pathing on those routes. In principle I'd like to see an hourly service to all the West Wales branches, but I;m not sure it's possible to get a 'perfect' service that marries up seamlessly!

I'm afraid that I don't think I have the necessary skills to assist with timetable planning!

 

[northwichcat]

It'd have to be a 90mph capable 153 or the 158 would then be unable to make use of the greater than 75mph linespeeds between Swansea and Cardiff. I doubt a 75mph unit would manage CDF - Llanelli in an hour without passing non-stop through Port Talbot and Bridgend.

Do ATW actually timetable their services to require faster than 75mph running? Their 150s and 153s seem to pop up just about anywhere and generally 175s arrive at stations earlier than you'd usually expect if they leave on time and aren't delayed en route.

 

[anthony263]

Do ATW actually timetable their services to require faster than 75mph running? Their 150s and 153s seem to pop up just about anywhere and generally 175s arrive at stations earlier than you'd usually expect if they leave on time and aren't delayed en route.

I have noticed that with the 175's when they work the swanline services.

I think the majority of ATW's service are timed for 75mph units, apart from the Manchester service between Cardiff & Manchester, which was re-timed to take into affect the greater performance of the class 175's compared to the 158's etc.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Yes, I see what you're geting at. It's difficult to timetable it though, as you say, and that's without thinking about platform considerations, or how the trains to further afield would have to fit in with pathing on those routes. In principle I'd like to see an hourly service to all the West Wales branches, but I;m not sure it's possible to get a 'perfect' service that marries up seamlessly!

I'm afraid that I don't think I have the necessary skills to assist with timetable planning!

I'm not sure Fishguard would justify more than a train every two hours, hence that's all it gets on my diagram. If the Pembroke Dock line had the capacity though I'd have put an hourly service down there on my diagram (I think I heard about a railtour going to Tenby once, so you might just manage hourly as far as Tenby, but it'd be pretty damn tight). Since Saundersfoot station is so far from the town and so close to Kilgetty station I wonder if it would be better to provide a bus from Kilgetty, re-name it "Kilgetty for Saundersfoot" and close Saundersfoot station. That might help reduce running times to allow for a more frequent service, I've no idea though.

 

[anthony263]

I'm not sure Fishguard would justify more than a train every two hours, hence that's all it gets on my diagram. If the Pembroke Dock line had the capacity though I'd have put an hourly service down there on my diagram (I think I heard about a railtour going to Tenby once, so you might just manage hourly as far as Tenby, but it'd be pretty damn tight). Since Saundersfoot station is so far from the town and so close to Kilgetty station I wonder if it would be better to provide a bus from Kilgetty, re-name it "Kilgetty for Saundersfoot" and close Saundersfoot station. That might help reduce running times to allow for a more frequent service, I've no idea though.

Main problem with the Pembroke dock branch as the only passing place at Tenby and the tight curves on the section between Whitland & Tenby.

Another problems is the low line speed between Tenby & Pembroke Dock, mostly because of open crossings etc. There are a few places where the line could be double tracked with higher line speeds.

Killgetty is good well used station although it doesn't seem to have many parking spaces if any at, unlike Saundersfoot which has a couple and is especially well used by holiday makers in the summer season.

 

[ValleyLines142]

CrossCountry runs one train in each direction per day between Cardiff and Manchester (via Birmingham), with first class. These seem to be timed reasonably for Cardiff to Manchester business travel. Apart from that, changing at Birmingham isn't a huge burden.

The CrossCountry service between Cardiff and Manchester (1M25 CDF - MAN, 1V65 MAN - CDF) is actually longer by about 30 minutes than Arriva services, so people are probably put off by that.

 

[PHILIPE]

This runs to and from Cardiff to Manchester as specified by DFT so that there could be a XC (other than Cardiff Nottinghams now) to and from Cardiff. It slots into the hourly Bristol to Manchester path. Totally useless for passengers but just to suit DFT. A service to the North East or Edinburgh would have been more suitable for passengers, but everybody knows how DaFT play trains.

 

[Flamingo]

Of course, the issue of First Class and 175's is all a matter of perception. I was once on a 175 on the Maesteg run, when two teenagers walked past me, and one said to the other "The whole train is 1st class!".

I told them to sit down, nobody would mind as it was after dark!

 

[anthony263]

This runs to and from Cardiff to Manchester as specified by DFT so that there could be a XC (other than Cardiff Nottinghams now) to and from Cardiff. It slots into the hourly Bristol to Manchester path. Totally useless for passengers but just to suit DFT. A service to the North East or Edinburgh would have been more suitable for passengers, but everybody knows how DaFT play trains.

The crosscountry service from Cardiff - Manchester used to run to Newcastle until about 2007/2008 before the timetables were changed. Personally I would prefer it to run to the north west of england.

 

[northwichcat]

Of course, the issue of First Class and 175's is all a matter of perception. I was once on a 175 on the Maesteg run, when two teenagers walked past me, and one said to the toher "The whole train is 1st class!".

When I first caught a 3 car 175 running a Mid-Cheshire line service in the early 00s and being used to 150s forming the primary traction at that time (mixed in with 101s, 142s, 158s and loco-hauled mk2s) I thought I'd boarded a First Class carriage!

 

[jones_bangor]

When I first caught a 3 car 175 running a Mid-Cheshire line service in the early 00s and being used to 150s forming the primary traction at that time (mixed in with 101s, 142s, 158s and loco-hauled mk2s) I thought I'd boarded a First Class carriage!

175 are nice trains, they'd be perfect if they'd been built as 3 / 4 car units rather than 2 / 3 units.....

Then there'd be room for a small "club class" at one end.

 

[ValleyLines142]

175 are nice trains, they'd be perfect if they'd been built as 3 / 4 car units rather than 2 / 3 units.....

Then there'd be room for a small "club class" at one end.

That's actually not a bad shout, I do agree with you on that one. Some of the 175s are so overcrowded it is ridiculous; don't even get me started on 1V87!!

I mean some units are 3-car units which is better.

 

[animationmilo]

That's actually not a bad shout, I do agree with you on that one. Some of the 175s are so overcrowded it is ridiculous; don't even get me started on 1V87!!

I mean some units are 3-car units which is better.

What time train is 1V87?

 

[Pacerpilot]

1430 Manchester Pic - Milford (1738 ex Cardiff) Its suffered chronic overcrowding since FGW pulled the 1728 Swansea bound HST.

 

[anthony263]

1430 Manchester Pic - Milford (1738 ex Cardiff) Its suffered chronic overcrowding since FGW pulled the 1728 Swansea bound HST.

That I certainly agree with especially since it provides a connection for commuters traveling to Fishguard Harbour and this isn't helping to get more people to use the new extra trains to Fishguard.

If there was stock available I would reconmend running a train from Cardiff at 17:27 either to Swansea or to Carmarthen via the Swansea district line to Carmarthen just to take off some of the pressure on the 17:37 service to Milford Haven.

Ideally this should be booked for a 3 carriage class 175 or it should have been left as it was which a Ebbw Vale - Swansea service departing Cardiff @ 17:37 which then formed the 19:10 Swansea - Cardiff swanline service another service which is suffering since the May 2011 timetable change as the stock is worked by the train which does the 18:04 departure from Cardiff - Swansea which only has 3 minutes or so turnaround at Swansea.

Ideally I would have kept the 17:37 as a through service from Ebbw Vale and worked it as a class 150 & 153 or perhaps 2 class 150's as far as Swansea with 1 unit continuing to Milford Haven and the other working the 19:10 service back to Cardiff.

 

[ValleyLines142]

What time train is 1V87?

1430 Manchester to Milford Haven, leaves Cardiff at 1739.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

1430 Manchester Pic - Milford (1738 ex Cardiff) Its suffered chronic overcrowding since FGW pulled the 1728 Swansea bound HST.

It's only booked for a 2-car 175 too! Actually, I don't think the 1728 Swansea FGW service has run for a long time, has been the 1515 from London for ages.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That I certainly agree with especially since it provides a connection for commuters traveling to Fishguard Harbour and this isn't helping to get more people to use the new extra trains to Fishguard.

If there was stock available I would reconmend running a train from Cardiff at 17:27 either to Swansea or to Carmarthen via the Swansea district line to Carmarthen just to take off some of the pressure on the 17:37 service to Milford Haven.

Ideally this should be booked for a 3 carriage class 175 or it should have been left as it was which a Ebbw Vale - Swansea service departing Cardiff @ 17:37 which then formed the 19:10 Swansea - Cardiff swanline service another service which is suffering since the May 2011 timetable change as the stock is worked by the train which does the 18:04 departure from Cardiff - Swansea which only has 3 minutes or so turnaround at Swansea.

Ideally I would have kept the 17:37 as a through service from Ebbw Vale and worked it as a class 150 & 153 or perhaps 2 class 150's as far as Swansea with 1 unit continuing to Milford Haven and the other working the 19:10 service back to Cardiff.

1V87 is currently timed to connect with 2E34 at Clarbeston Road, the 2005 service to Fishguard Harbour for a ferry to Rosslare. However, 1V87 is so overcrowded with commuters leaving Cardiff at peak hour at 1739 that people wanting to catch a ferry are put off by the business of the train or simply cannot get on, because at the moment it is currently only booked for a 2-car 175. I don't think the Milford Haven should be a 150, but what I think would be a good suggestion is to have 1V87 booked as a splitting service, dividing at Carmarthen, Whitland or Clarbeston Road. 1V87 could run as the 1330 Manchester Piccadilly to Milford Haven & Fishguard Harbour. Upon dividing, 1V87 could continue as normal to Milford Haven, being unaffected arriving at the current time of 2032, ready to depart with the return journey of 1E49, the 2036 to Carmarthen, and then the current 2E34 (if it can still carry that headcode) being amalgamated into 1V87 upon arrival at whatever the dividing station could be. Again it would be unaffected, still arriving at Fishguard Harbour at 2030, ready to return with 2E35, the 2050 departure from there to Carmarthen. By doing this, this would mean the 1V87 would be formed of either a 2-car 175 + 2-car 175 or even a 3-car 175 on the Milford Haven portion and a 2-car 175 on the Fishguard portion. That way, there would be enough capacity from as far back as Cardiff which would hopefully reduce the problem of overcrowding on the current 2-car only service, and also people who want to connect at Fishguard for ferries would have a direct service and would no longer have to change at Clarbeston Road. Also, there is only a five minute gap to change trains at Clarbeston Road, which I personally think is pushing it a bit as 1V87 is delayed by roughly ten minutes quite often. I think this could work!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ideally this should be booked for a 3 carriage class 175 or it should have been left as it was which a Ebbw Vale - Swansea service departing Cardiff @ 17:37 which then formed the 19:10 Swansea - Cardiff swanline service another service which is suffering since the May 2011 timetable change as the stock is worked by the train which does the 18:04 departure from Cardiff - Swansea which only has 3 minutes or so turnaround at Swansea.

1V87 and what was 2B71 (1640 Ebbw Vale - Swansea, left Cardiff at 1738) have actually been swapped round. It used to be the 1738 to Swansea, then the 1804 to Milford Haven, but now they've been swapped around and the Ebbw Vale to Swansea direct has been split in half with a 20 minute change required at Central now.