GwR HSTs to be stood down

[northernbelle]

There is no reason why an HST should lose time. In fact, it should be able to beat the IET on diesel as a 2+4 HST has a rather better power:weight ratio (15.8hp/t against 11.6hp/t for the Hitachi dross).

Power to weight ratio is irrelevant on a stop/start working like these. HSTs only have the edge on the sprints between Exeter and Highbridge - IETs are quicker on the shorter hops more or less everywhere else along the route.

The ability to lay full power down from the outset and not having vague braking gives IETs a performance edge on these workings.

A better power to weight ratio doesn't necessarily mean better acceleration as it relies on how much of that power you put down to the rails. However, it wouldn't surprise me if they accelerated faster than the IETs.

They do above a certain speed. But on services with 30+ station calls the initial getaway becomes more relevant.

2+4s also loose time because apart from a couple of stations dispatch must be done from the TGS so if you have had to use SDO you have to move back to the TGS. If you have a ramp at Highbridge and the unit is in reverse formation you have to move the train etc it's a right old faff. Once you loose time you never get it back on a 2+4.

Can be a nightmare. The dwell itself seems to be worse on an HST too - people seem to be slower boarding/alighting them.

 

[irish_rail]

Whenever I travel to Cornwall I attempt to find an IET service to travel back on because half the time the HSTs lose so much time that I miss my connection in Plymouth. That is the most important factor to me and the majority of passengers.

I have to take issue with this. If you get an HSS driver, we very easily keep the 2+4s to time, indeed often arriving early at intermediate stations. The issue is the HST work is heavily weighted now in favour of "GWR West" depots where many of the drivers have a couple of years experience , and many are not overly comfortable with the idea of a train where braking isn't "instant". Given time , many of these newer drivers will improve and any loss of time gone. In an ideal world , more HST work would go to Plymouth, Exeter, Penzance HSS, where all the drivers have driven full sized HSTs for many years previously, but that isn't how the crewing diagrams work. There is a heavy focus on PZ and Exeter West drivers on the HSTs whilst the HSS drivers spend our lives on the IETs. Id also dispute that the HSTs are full of selfish enthusiasts, I never see any enthusiasts on board, just locals, but that is my anecdotal experience I must admit.

 

[michael74]

I have to take issue with this. If you get an HSS driver, we very easily keep the 2+4s to time, indeed often arriving early at intermediate stations. The issue is the HST work is heavily weighted now in favour of "GWR West" depots where many of the drivers have a couple of years experience , and many are not overly comfortable with the idea of a train where braking isn't "instant". Given time , many of these newer drivers will improve and any loss of time gone. In an ideal world , more HST work would go to Plymouth, Exeter, Penzance HSS, where all the drivers have driven full sized HSTs for many years previously, but that isn't how the crewing diagrams work. There is a heavy focus on PZ and Exeter West drivers on the HSTs whilst the HSS drivers spend our lives on the IETs. Id also dispute that the HSTs are full of selfish enthusiasts, I never see any enthusiasts on board, just locals, but that is my anecdotal experience I must admit.

It's a good point but the driving is only 1/3rd of the problem with them, the operation, the state and the cost of the units are other reasons why they have had their time.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

It’s also worth noting (regarding HST vs IET timekeeping) is that each unit type has its own set of sectional running times. So unless you roster an HST to a service timed 802-D or an IET to a service timed HSTGW4 then any comparison is basically irrelevant/potentially misleading.

Incidentally both sets of sectional running times are considered to be a bit on the tight side relative to the traction capability by those who plan them, and it isn’t an easy task to convert a schedule from one set of timings to the other while maintaining all the ‘advertised’ timings en-route.

 

[Benjwri]

There is no reason why an HST should lose time. In fact, it should be able to beat the IET on diesel as a 2+4 HST has a rather better power:weight ratio (15.8hp/t against 11.6hp/t for the Hitachi dross).

Whenever I take an IET it sits at each station for a nearly comical amount of time so it doesn’t leave early, the HSTs consistently lose more and more time.

I have to take issue with this. If you get an HSS driver, we very easily keep the 2+4s to time, indeed often arriving early at intermediate stations. The issue is the HST work is heavily weighted now in favour of "GWR West" depots where many of the drivers have a couple of years experience , and many are not overly comfortable with the idea of a train where braking isn't "instant". Given time , many of these newer drivers will improve and any loss of time gone. In an ideal world , more HST work would go to Plymouth, Exeter, Penzance HSS, where all the drivers have driven full sized HSTs for many years previously, but that isn't how the crewing diagrams work. There is a heavy focus on PZ and Exeter West drivers on the HSTs whilst the HSS drivers spend our lives on the IETs. Id also dispute that the HSTs are full of selfish enthusiasts, I never see any enthusiasts on board, just locals, but that is my anecdotal experience I must admit.

And to a non enthusiast why they’re losing time doesn’t matter, just that they are. As it is I’d say the IETs more reliably arrive on time.

 

[RPI]

I work these services on a daily basis and I much prefer an IET im afraid, the HST's really are looking old and tired, the IET's are better suited, in fact, the IET's are better suited to this kind of work than they are to London work. Generally you get a lot less passenger grumbles on IET's too, except cyclists.

But on the other hand, if the rumoured four or five sets are to have a stay of execution then this can only be good as otherwise it would end up with units being taken from local services to cover, no doubt until some other units become available from elsewhere.

 

[Annetts key]

It's the enthusiast lobby that seem to decry the IETs - the truth is most passengers don't actually care about what the train is but more the key features of it. Believe it or not, enthusiast specialisms such as seat hardness is trumped by other factors, many of which the HSTs, these days, fall short on.

No, IETs are not liked because, for a modern train, they are utter rubbish. The noise from the engines and air con inside. The noise from the engines when stood on a platform opposite. The cables linking the carriages that idiots could try to climb. The seats are rubbish. The ride is rubbish. The air con may be working okay-ish at the moment, but will it still be in a few years time? The seat reservation system does not always work. The stupid position of the electrical sockets, and these not always easily accepting all plugs (although Hitachi may have fixed this now). The toilets are not fit for purpose (rubbish doors, rubbish water dispenser, rubbish hand dryer). The big crack issue. The number of generator units that fail. The list just goes on and on and on.

Yes, the HSTs are old. Yes, they should be replaced. But, they are better than the 165 and 166 turbos (which should also be replaced).

And at the moment, for me, I would rather have a HST than a clapped out 165 and 166 turbo, or a IET.

Oh, and for the record, I’m not an enthusiast. Just someone who travels a lot on trains.

Once you loose time you never get it back on a 2+4.

Not true. I’ve seen one make up time.

IETs also loose time due to platform duties.

 

[LiftFan]

No, IETs are not liked because, for a modern train, they are utter rubbish. The noise from the engines and air con inside. The noise from the engines when stood on a platform opposite. The cables linking the carriages that idiots could try to climb. The seats are rubbish. The ride is rubbish. The air con may be working okay-ish at the moment, but will it still be in a few years time? The seat reservation system does not always work. The stupid position of the electrical sockets, and these not always easily accepting all plugs (although Hitachi may have fixed this now). The toilets are not fit for purpose (rubbish doors, rubbish water dispenser, rubbish hand dryer). The big crack issue. The number of generator units that fail. The list just goes on and on and on.

Yes, the HSTs are old. Yes, they should be replaced. But, they are better than the 165 and 166 turbos (which should also be replaced).

And at the moment, for me, I would rather have a HST than a clapped out 165 and 166 turbo, or a IET.

Oh, and for the record, I’m not an enthusiast. Just someone who travels a lot on trains.


Not true. I’ve seen one make up time.

IETs also loose time due to platform duties.

These days? I'd say the best suited train for the Penzance - Cardiff route are 158s. They're comfortable, the interiors are looking modern and have an overall nice ambience. I'd be willing to say they're probably the best stock GWR have right now. The HSTs are looking worn out, the IETs are dreadful for comfort, the 150s have been refurbished well but 75mph running is not suitable long distance, and the Turbos feel like they're already falling to bits despite being one of GWRs newer diesel units.

 

[northernbelle]

No, IETs are not liked because, for a modern train, they are utter rubbish. The noise from the engines and air con inside. The noise from the engines when stood on a platform opposite. The cables linking the carriages that idiots could try to climb. The seats are rubbish. The ride is rubbish. The air con may be working okay-ish at the moment, but will it still be in a few years time? The seat reservation system does not always work. The stupid position of the electrical sockets, and these not always easily accepting all plugs (although Hitachi may have fixed this now). The toilets are not fit for purpose (rubbish doors, rubbish water dispenser, rubbish hand dryer). The big crack issue. The number of generator units that fail. The list just goes on and on and on.

Yes, the HSTs are old. Yes, they should be replaced. But, they are better than the 165 and 166 turbos (which should also be replaced).

And at the moment, for me, I would rather have a HST than a clapped out 165 and 166 turbo, or a IET.

Oh, and for the record, I’m not an enthusiast. Just someone who travels a lot on trains.


Not true. I’ve seen one make up time.

IETs also loose time due to platform duties.

Not liked? By whom? Because I'm certain customers aren't writing in to GWR to complain about more or less everything on your list. Many are technical aspects that you're aware of as an enthusiast (sorry but the fact you're writing on this forum means you are one) The general public don't really care about this detail - see my previous post for what they do notice.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Generally you get a lot less passenger grumbles on IET's too

Yes,standard class passengers just love those first class seats,so much in fact that they don’t want to move!

 

[RPI]

Yes,standard class passengers just love those first class seats,so much in fact that they don’t want to move!

I've not had any issues with it, usually first class is full of cheap advances on those services that there's little room, in fact, on those trains I often get more people sat in standard with 1st tickets because they've bought the cheapest advance ticket that popped up and they hadn't realised it was 1st class!

No, IETs are not liked because, for a modern train, they are utter rubbish. The noise from the engines and air con inside. The noise from the engines when stood on a platform opposite. The cables linking the carriages that idiots could try to climb. The seats are rubbish. The ride is rubbish. The air con may be working okay-ish at the moment, but will it still be in a few years time? The seat reservation system does not always work. The stupid position of the electrical sockets, and these not always easily accepting all plugs (although Hitachi may have fixed this now). The toilets are not fit for purpose (rubbish doors, rubbish water dispenser, rubbish hand dryer). The big crack issue. The number of generator units that fail. The list just goes on and on and on.

Yes, the HSTs are old. Yes, they should be replaced. But, they are better than the 165 and 166 turbos (which should also be replaced).

And at the moment, for me, I would rather have a HST than a clapped out 165 and 166 turbo, or a IET.

Oh, and for the record, I’m not an enthusiast. Just someone who travels a lot on trains.


Not true. I’ve seen one make up time.

IETs also loose time due to platform duties.

Thats just a list of hyperbole, I can't believe I find myself in a situation of defending IET's here but most of that is rubbish, you can bearly hear the engines inside, the aircon is much quieter than the constant drone of that on a 158/159.

The seats are rock hard, but I don't think I've ever heard a passenger even mention it, the toilets are neither here nor there really, they work and the hand dryers actually dry your hands.

At the end of the day, they're more than adequate for Cardiff to Penzance, especially when you think that 5 years back it would most likely have been a 150, the HST's are knackered, their aircon is lovely and quiet.... as most of the time its not working.

 

[michael74]

No, IETs are not liked because, for a modern train, they are utter rubbish. The noise from the engines and air con inside. The noise from the engines when stood on a platform opposite. The cables linking the carriages that idiots could try to climb. The seats are rubbish. The ride is rubbish. The air con may be working okay-ish at the moment, but will it still be in a few years time? The seat reservation system does not always work. The stupid position of the electrical sockets, and these not always easily accepting all plugs (although Hitachi may have fixed this now). The toilets are not fit for purpose (rubbish doors, rubbish water dispenser, rubbish hand dryer). The big crack issue. The number of generator units that fail. The list just goes on and on and on.

Yes, the HSTs are old. Yes, they should be replaced. But, they are better than the 165 and 166 turbos (which should also be replaced).

And at the moment, for me, I would rather have a HST than a clapped out 165 and 166 turbo, or a IET.

Oh, and for the record, I’m not an enthusiast. Just someone who travels a lot on trains.


Not true. I’ve seen one make up time.

IETs also loose time due to platform duties.

The noise from the engines when stood on a platform opposite

Is nothing compared to a 2+4 or a Voyager

The cables linking the carriages that idiots could try to climb

It was looked at early on but has now been deemed safe and I am yet to hear of it being a real issue

The air con may be working okay-ish at the moment, but will it still be in a few years time?

It works, and why wouldn't it continue to work? The aircon in plenty of 2+4s is non existent

The seat reservation system does not always work.

It works the vast majority of the time and at least their is one, 2+4s dont have any

The stupid position of the electrical sockets

The sockets on the 2+4 get on my nerves....

The toilets are not fit for purpose (rubbish doors, rubbish water dispenser, rubbish hand dryer)

Still better than the small toilets on the 2+4 (the UAT are comparable)

The big crack issue

Being fixed, yes it will take years but its a new design I am fairly certain HSTs did not enter service without design and manufacting issues later found

The number of generator units that fail

Being fixed now, less of an issue, its not uncommon for a whole 2+4 power car to fail....

Not true. I’ve seen one make up time.

So have I, but as discussed up thread that can be more to do with driving style... one does not make it all...

IETs also loose time due to platform duties.

What aspect of platform duties are slower than a 2+4, where is time lost in comparison?

As for Turbos... You are comparing Apples and Pears.

 

[43096]

the HST's are knackered, their aircon is lovely and quiet.... as most of the time its not working.

That’s more about Laira’s “maintenance” than the train itself. It will be interesting to see if the 802s also decline once Laira get involved.

 

[Class172]

These days? I'd say the best suited train for the Penzance - Cardiff route are 158s. They're comfortable, the interiors are looking modern and have an overall nice ambience. I'd be willing to say they're probably the best stock GWR have right now. The HSTs are looking worn out, the IETs are dreadful for comfort, the 150s have been refurbished well but 75mph running is not suitable long distance, and the Turbos feel like they're already falling to bits despite being one of GWRs newer diesel units.

Just a point of note but the Turbos are hardly any younger than the 158, both being built in the early 90s, though I do think the Turbos have a much newer looking design. Where they are suffering however is a lack of spare parts due to a key supplier going bust I believe, which I presume isn't affecting the 158s to the same level.

 

[irish_rail]

I've not had any issues with it, usually first class is full of cheap advances on those services that there's little room, in fact, on those trains I often get more people sat in standard with 1st tickets because they've bought the cheapest advance ticket that popped up and they hadn't realised it was 1st class!


Thats just a list of hyperbole, I can't believe I find myself in a situation of defending IET's here but most of that is rubbish, you can bearly hear the engines inside, the aircon is much quieter than the constant drone of that on a 158/159.

The seats are rock hard, but I don't think I've ever heard a passenger even mention it, the toilets are neither here nor there really, they work and the hand dryers actually dry your hands.

At the end of the day, they're more than adequate for Cardiff to Penzance, especially when you think that 5 years back it would most likely have been a 150, the HST's are knackered, their aircon is lovely and quiet.... as most of the time its not working.

I've definitely heard normal passengers complain about the IET rock hard seating, and frequently too.

 

[Annetts key]

Many are technical aspects that you're aware of as an enthusiast (sorry but the fact you're writing on this forum means you are one)

So as someone who worked within the industry and who travels by train often (and when travelling for work purposes, my employer paid for the tickets), that makes me an enthusiast?

My point is that IET trains are not as good as they should and could have been. That’s why on these forums and elsewhere they are getting compared to other trains which may be better in some aspects.

If IETs were fantastic, don’t you think that the reaction would be different?

I have no access to any form of feedback from passengers other than occasionally hearing them make comments. So I don’t know the overall satisfaction level or otherwise or types and numbers of complaints. And hence would not comment on this.

Do you have access to the passenger feedback to any TOC?

As I have repeatedly said on these forums, the HSTs are old and should have been replaced. But unfortunately GWR don’t have any new trains to replace the 150s, the 158s, the 165 and 165 turbos. And the HST 2+4 sets are filling in for services that otherwise would have been formed from these classes of DMUs (likely with short forming to try to cover the timetabled services). Or worse, cancelled services or withdrawal of some timetabled services.

My preference for HST 2+4 sets is because they are better IMHO than the 165 and 165 turbos (mainly longer and therefore more capacity, and better seats). And the seats are far more comfortable than the seats on the GWR IETs.

If GWR were to get new good quality trains to replace the 2+4 HSTs, the 150s, the 158s, the 165 and 165 turbos and which would release the IETs to run the long distance services to London Paddington, then that would be excellent news. But that’s simply not going to happen anytime soon.

Thats just a list of hyperbole

Well, thank you for the compliment

you can bearly hear the engines inside, the aircon is much quieter than the constant drone of that on a 158/159.

Yes, the IETs are far better than various other trains. But that does not mean that they are as good as they could have been.

The seats are rock hard, but I don't think I've ever heard a passenger even mention it, the toilets are neither here nor there really, they work and the hand dryers actually dry your hands.

Again, on all these points, for new modern trains, they could have been so much better.

At the end of the day, they're more than adequate for Cardiff to Penzance, especially when you think that 5 years back it would most likely have been a 150, the HST's are knackered, their aircon is lovely and quiet.... as most of the time its not working.

Is this where we are at, “adequate”? Is that the word to describe what is supposed to be the preferred long distance train in this country?

And yes, as I have said before, the 2+4 HSTs are old and should have been replaced. See my other comments about this.

 

[Class172]

If GWR were to get new good quality trains to replace the 2+4 HSTs, the 150s, the 158s, the 165 and 165 turbos and which would release the IETs to run the long distance services to London Paddington, then that would be excellent news. But that’s simply not going to happen anytime soon.

Isn't that the intention of the so-called 'Operation Churchward'? I'm not clued up on the plan itself but my understanding is that it would form the rolling stock replacement strategy for GWR's non-intercity stock.

 

[michael74]

Isn't that the intention of the so-called 'Operation Churchward'? I'm not clued up on the plan itself but my understanding is that it would form the rolling stock replacement strategy for GWR's non-intercity stock.

Indeed it is, one class of train with differing internal layouts and power units depending on its location and use across the GWR network. Their is very little information about it and unsurprisingly so as I am sure its all very commercially sensitive, but my understanding is they are looking at completion towards the end of this decade.... In the meantime a heavy overhaul of the 150s hope the 158s hold out a bit longer and sort the spares for the Turbos out......

 

[northernbelle]

So as someone who worked within the industry and who travels by train often (and when travelling for work purposes, my employer paid for the tickets), that makes me an enthusiast?

My point is that IET trains are not as good as they should and could have been. That’s why on these forums and elsewhere they are getting compared to other trains which may be better in some aspects.

If IETs were fantastic, don’t you think that the reaction would be different?

I have no access to any form of feedback from passengers other than occasionally hearing them make comments. So I don’t know the overall satisfaction level or otherwise or types and numbers of complaints. And hence would not comment on this.

Do you have access to the passenger feedback to any TOC?

As I have repeatedly said on these forums, the HSTs are old and should have been replaced. But unfortunately GWR don’t have any new trains to replace the 150s, the 158s, the 165 and 165 turbos. And the HST 2+4 sets are filling in for services that otherwise would have been formed from these classes of DMUs (likely with short forming to try to cover the timetabled services). Or worse, cancelled services or withdrawal of some timetabled services.

My preference for HST 2+4 sets is because they are better IMHO than the 165 and 165 turbos (mainly longer and therefore more capacity, and better seats). And the seats are far more comfortable than the seats on the GWR IETs.

If GWR were to get new good quality trains to replace the 2+4 HSTs, the 150s, the 158s, the 165 and 165 turbos and which would release the IETs to run the long distance services to London Paddington, then that would be excellent news. But that’s simply not going to happen anytime soon.


Well, thank you for the compliment


Yes, the IETs are far better than various other trains. But that does not mean that they are as good as they could have been.


Again, on all these points, for new modern trains, they could have been so much better.


Is this where we are at, “adequate”? Is that the word to describe what is supposed to be the preferred long distance train in this country?

And yes, as I have said before, the 2+4 HSTs are old and should have been replaced. See my other comments about this.

No, the fact you're taking the time to post on this forum makes you an enthusiast.

The discussion here is about GWR 2+4 HSTs and naturally there is a comparison between those and the IETs that are replacing them on the Cardiff-Penzance service. There is lots that could be better about an IET, but mine and others fundamental point is that they are more suitable for the work they are replacing 2+4s on.

I do have access to TOC feedback - the enthusiast led viewpoints on here usually take a much different focus to what the general public seem to care about.

 

[Snow1964]

Indeed it is, one class of train with differing internal layouts and power units depending on its location and use across the GWR network. Their is very little information about it and unsurprisingly so as I am sure its all very commercially sensitive, but my understanding is they are looking at completion towards the end of this decade.... In the meantime a heavy overhaul of the 150s hope the 158s hold out a bit longer and sort the spares for the Turbos out......

The plan is HSTs to go 2023 (brought forward from 2025), but now with some surviving until late 2024, However the planned Churchward units probably won't be ordered until 2025 -2026 with delivery about 2028-31 (dates based on other threads, no official dates)

So either got to thin out a service somewhere, get higher availability from existing fleet, or find someone else's cast offs to replace the 4-5 HSTs being retained for the few years until new Churchward fleet arrives.

Let's be honest if the hope is higher availability of IETs, why would that magically happen in Autumn 2024, that it couldn't happen later this year. It's unreasonable to assume a different outcome in 20 months to 8 months time unless there is a big known improvement happening that cannot happen earlier.

 

[Bikeman78]

They're not in the best of nick unlike the ScotRail ones, they are just as they were when running out of Paddington, including the horrible lighting and broken stuff.

But, unlike the Scottish ones, they cover all their booked work and rarely break down.

No, in terms of experience I was thinking more that fact there are tables around 4, better disabled access, reservations available, bigger doorways with less of a step, more toilets, a reliable PIS system inside and out, aircon that actually works in the summer etc. This is actually what people care about after reliability of the service. I'm not denying there are some inferior aspects such as the provision for bikes or a large 'general use' area for buggies and the like.

Why have so many toilets been locked out on the HSTs? They used to have two on most vehicles. When did the aircon become a problem? It worked fine whilst they were running out of Paddington. I'd find the occasional hot coach in the summer but only rarely. Certainly way better than a 158 or 166.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

But, unlike the Scottish ones, they cover all their booked work and rarely break down.


Why have so many toilets been locked out on the HSTs? They used to have two on most vehicles. When did the aircon become a problem? It worked fine whilst they were running out of Paddington. I'd find the occasional hot coach in the summer but only rarely. Certainly way better than a 158 or 166.

They needed space to fit the CET equipment which meant loosing one toilet for everyone one which has been CET fitted.

 

[Annetts key]

No, the fact you're taking the time to post on this forum makes you an enthusiast.

So if that is your definition, then you are also an enthusiast.

 

[northernbelle]

So if that is your definition, then you are also an enthusiast.

Indeed! I've never stated otherwise.

 

[fgwrich]

They needed space to fit the CET equipment which meant loosing one toilet for everyone one which has been CET fitted.

With the exception of the TS-D, the GW examples only ended up having one toilet per coach anyway, so CET fitment didn't make much of a difference (though you cant fit CET tanks in the opposite end anyway as the brake rigging is located under the opposite end). The second toilet was lost after the main FGW refurbishment, where it was replaced with equipment including a boiler for the proposed trolley service in the High Density sets - though a boiler in every coach seemed a little excessive.

 

[northernbelle]

With the exception of the TS-D, the GW examples only ended up having one toilet per coach anyway, so CET fitment didn't make much of a difference (though you cant fit CET tanks in the opposite end anyway as the brake rigging is located under the opposite end). The second toilet was lost after the main FGW refurbishment, where it was replaced with equipment including a boiler for the proposed trolley service in the High Density sets - though a boiler in every coach seemed a little excessive.

That's not the case. The FGW refurbishment saw boilers fitted only to the former toilet areas in the TGS vehicles and one end of a single TF in each formation.

The standard TS and half the TF vehicles all retained two toilets.

 

[yorksrob]

I work these services on a daily basis and I much prefer an IET im afraid, the HST's really are looking old and tired, the IET's are better suited, in fact, the IET's are better suited to this kind of work than they are to London work. Generally you get a lot less passenger grumbles on IET's too, except cyclists.

But on the other hand, if the rumoured four or five sets are to have a stay of execution then this can only be good as otherwise it would end up with units being taken from local services to cover, no doubt until some other units become available from elsewhere.

I had this discussion with a guard on Cross Country. She disliked the HST's because they were older and more difficult to operate.

I liked them because they were more comfortable.

The key for passengers is capacity. We're given warm words about how the remaining fleet will suffice, but these seem to be at the behest of the DfT.

 

[43096]

With the exception of the TS-D, the GW examples only ended up having one toilet per coach anyway, so CET fitment didn't make much of a difference (though you cant fit CET tanks in the opposite end anyway as the brake rigging is located under the opposite end). The second toilet was lost after the main FGW refurbishment, where it was replaced with equipment including a boiler for the proposed trolley service in the High Density sets - though a boiler in every coach seemed a little excessive.

The brake frame prevents installation at no 2 end. No 1 end isn't easy, either, as although there is underframe space the solution adopted seems to need moving a load of electrical equipment.

 

[RPI]

I've definitely heard normal passengers complain about the IET rock hard seating, and frequently too.

Through the cab door? probably about 3 or 4 times since they were introduced I've heard that, and I'm interacting with passengers a lot more than yourself (that's not meant in a rude way)

Tha

I had this discussion with a guard on Cross Country. She disliked the HST's because they were older and more difficult to operate.

I liked them because they were more comfortable.

The key for passengers is capacity. We're given warm words about how the remaining fleet will suffice, but these seem to be at the behest of the DfT.

Thats the key, I do think keeping a handful of sets is sensible in the short term as the IET fleet will be stretched too much whilst the crack repairs are ongoing.

 

[Ashley Hill]

I had this discussion with a guard on Cross Country. She disliked the HST's because they were older and more difficult to operate.

What’s is so difficult?