GWR short train lengths

[Clarence Yard]

Although this isn't always the case and Swansea suffers from short forms the same as the rest of the network. There would've been a short form on a Swansea service this evening, which could've been prevented if more units were available, although obvious whether that actually happened with todays chaos I do not know.

I was describing the morning start up from Swansea, which is where most of the Swansea short forms issues have been. And they can finish there too because if you have a unit at Maliphant that has come good during the day and you haven’t got a service to put it on, you have to ensure you have one less unit going in there to balance it all out for the following morning.

There are 13 turnaround services at Swansea station during the day and 7 of them are formed from Swansea starters, so there is a strong chance that if you are short off Maliphant that day, you will see a train short again at Swansea sometime during the rest of the day.

There are a pair of 802 5 cars that work off Stoke Gifford that do visit Swansea during the day but it’s that depot, Laira and Long Rock that will influence the units put on the former HST workings, not North Pole which is also where the remaining Swansea turnarounds originate from.

The spares position yesterday was 1 802 5 car set at LA and 1 802 5 car set at NP, the latter having come off engine repairs that morning. That is not going to make a significant dent in any shortforming, especially if you hit additional unit problems during the day.

 

[Deepgreen]

You mean stellar mediocrity by the DfT which has insisted that GWR (as well as some others) remove stock to make cost savings. GWR has its hands tied in the matter.

Indeed, but that still translates to Britain's railways without blaming any specific TOC. This is part of the much-touted 'green recovery' from C19 that our glorious leader at the time promised.

 

[QSK19]

It’s clear that there are differences of opinion here, which is good because democracy needs that; however, as per the Mod’s instruction to stay on topic, to use an example of one of my recent journeys with GWR, I went on a 80x service that was a 5 car instead of a 9 car. I boarded at Bristol Parkway and travelled westbound. Whilst there was a reason for this (GWR claimed it was because the planned 9 car had a fault; so a 5 car stepped in), the platform was heaving and people had to be left at the platform. Whilst this was an exceptional circumstance, it doesn’t bode well if DfT’s strategy is for this to be a permanent way of working.

 

[43096]

The spares position yesterday was 1 802 5 car set at LA and 1 802 5 car set at NP, the latter having come off engine repairs that morning. That is not going to make a significant dent in any shortforming, especially if you hit additional unit problems during the day.

Like bits of the roof coming loose, damaging the knitting and wrecking the service for a couple of days.

 

[Deepgreen]

While working for local authorities, I learnt that many folks went straight to their MP with even a minor/trivial issue rather than go through the proper channels, whether the council, NHS, train/bus operator, Royal Mail etc. then approach the MP if all else failed.

Yes, because the TOCs and others utterly fail to provide useful answers - my long experience is that they either fail to grasp the points being made in complaints (probably because the customer service operatives have no understanding of the railway, etc.) or simply ignore them and fire out stock answers. No wonder people become fed up with wasting so much time on the 'correct' route, when they know it's probably going to be a month or so of wasted time. However, in the case of my useless MP, he simply asked the same question of the TOC, got the same answer and sent it back to me - utterly pointless!

 

[Benjwri]

It’s clear that there are differences of opinion here, which is good because democracy needs that; however, as per the Mod’s instruction to stay on topic, to use an example of one of my recent journeys with GWR, I went on a 80x service that was a 5 car instead of a 9 car. I boarded at Bristol Parkway and travelled westbound. Whilst there was a reason for this (GWR claimed it was because the planned 9 car had a fault; so a 5 car stepped in), the platform was heaving and people had to be left at the platform. Whilst this was an exceptional circumstance, it doesn’t bode well if DfT’s strategy is for this to be a permanent way of working.

Had exactly the same thing on a Bristol-London service a week on Saturday, the following service was also short formed so can't imagine the chaos on that.

 

[Snow1964]

GWR have had quite a lot of short forms due to rolling stock faults.

Part of the problem is there are lots of stabling at locations that cannot do basic maintenance. Not helped by a policy of checking the train at these locations before service (rather than when it is stabled), so leaving insufficient time to swap units (assuming they can find a driver and a path to bring up a spare unit)

But even where they know they are unlikely to be able to bring in a spare unit, they chose not to keep one nearby.

There is a balancing act between cutting costs, and not having sufficient serviceable rolling stock to operate the full timetabled service, and clearly they are leaving themselves too thin in certain locations based on number of short formed trains.

It is not like it happens once or twice a month which would be reasonable, instead it tends to happen multiple times a day which is symptomatic of over-stretching the stock. Since moving to Wiltshire 2.5 years ago, I cannot think of a single weekday on my line where at least 2 trains are short formed, and I've seen over dozen trains from my local station short formed in a day

 

[Clarence Yard]

Had exactly the same thing on a Bristol-London service a week on Saturday, the following service was also short formed so can't imagine the chaos on that.

A week last Saturday was poor for availability from the start - down 3 800 5 cars and down 4 802 9 cars so they had a bit of a struggle that day. Although they were 1 up on 800 9 cars and 2 up on 802 5 cars, they were, of course, not all in the right place to help.

 

[Pete_uk]

There must be short forms somewhere as a lot of the Cheltenhams are 9 or 10 carriages this week.

 

[Horizon22]

Although this isn't always the case and Swansea suffers from short forms the same as the rest of the network. There would've been a short form on a Swansea service this evening, which could've been prevented if more units were available, although obvious whether that actually happened with todays chaos I do not know.

The only way to resolve it otherwise is by strengthening up at Paddington with a unit from North Pole Depot but it doesn't help if there's a shortage of 5-cars more generally and causes major balancing problems.

GWR controllers will look at this throughout the day, but any disruption could throw things out of kilter completely - better a 5 car runs than nothing or a 5 car instead of a 9-car or whatever permutation you can consider.

There must be short forms somewhere as a lot of the Cheltenhams are 9 or 10 carriages this week.

This is part of it - strengthening for the races will result in some middle of the day short-forms, and these tend to be Bristol services.

 

[Master29]

A week last Saturday was poor for availability from the start - down 3 800 5 cars and down 4 802 9 cars so they had a bit of a struggle that day. Although they were 1 up on 800 9 cars and 2 up on 802 5 cars, they were, of course, not all in the right place to help.

Is this because the different leasing companies involved as per 800/802 and the distribution within GWR land?

 

[Benjwri]

A week last Saturday was poor for availability from the start - down 3 800 5 cars and down 4 802 9 cars so they had a bit of a struggle that day. Although they were 1 up on 800 9 cars and 2 up on 802 5 cars, they were, of course, not all in the right place to help.

To be fair the unit I was on got a second 800 from North Pole attached to it as soon as it arrived at Paddington, but still this is a case that would’ve been helped by the 802s not running Penzance-Cardiff

 

[Horizon22]

Is this because the different leasing companies involved as per 800/802 and the distribution within GWR land?

A 9-car coming good doesn't necessarily resolve a 5-car running instead of a 10 car. And yes if it's not much use at completely the other end of the network which then means fair bit of logistics to get everything in a line which might not always be practical.

 

[Benjwri]

This is part of it - strengthening for the races will result in some middle of the day short-forms, and these tend to be Bristol services.

To be fair today it seems they’ve been taken from the Cardiff-Penzance services (And a Worcester service which was replaced by a turbo), and replaced by Castle Class, but obviously this is only going to be a possible solution for so much longer.

 

[Horizon22]

To be fair today it seems they’ve been taken from the Cardiff-Penzance services (And a Worcester service which was replaced by a turbo), and replaced by Castle Class, but obviously this is only going to be a possible solution for so much longer.

You know things are really getting bad stock-wise when the N. Cotswolds is being supplemented by a turbo!

 

[Benjwri]

You know things are really getting bad stock-wise when the N. Cotswolds is being supplemented by a turbo!

Yep! Although think this may have been seen as a convenient opportunity as it was cancelled between London and Reading anyways, so a train was taken off the Basingstoke service. There haven’t been any IET London short forms this evening.

 

[Siemens Staines]

I may have understood RTT incorrectly, but did 165113 not come off the 1400 Redhill - Reading to work the Worcester and 165116, which normally would have worked the 1601 Reading - Gatwick, working the 1620 Reading - Redhill instead of 165113 and the 1601 Gatwick cancelled?

 

[Benjwri]

I may have understood RTT incorrectly, but did 165113 not come off the 1400 Redhill - Reading to work the Worcester and 165116, which normally would have worked the 1601 Reading - Gatwick, working the 1620 Reading - Redhill instead of 165113 and the 1601 Gatwick cancelled?

Yeah appologies appears I entirely misread it

 

[ValleyLines142]

There must be short forms somewhere as a lot of the Cheltenhams are 9 or 10 carriages this week.

Only 3 more so than usual.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Is this because the different leasing companies involved as per 800/802 and the distribution within GWR land?

No, it’s because there are four different classes that start from five significant depots and two outstations which are all spread over a large geographical area and those units are required to start and finish in specific 5, 9 & 10 car formations.

It’s a daily suduko problem where if one little thing goes wrong, it can throw it all out. GWR Control earns it’s money coping with this, day after day.

 

[Randomer]

No, it’s because there are four different classes that start from five significant depots and two outstations which are all spread over a large geographical area and those units are required to start and finish in specific 5, 9 & 10 car formations.

Which fundamentally shows that the short forming issue isn't ever likely to be resolved.

It might get better or worse depending on the particular issues the 800 or 802 units are having but eventually as the units age it is only going to get worse. I completely accept that Agility will end up with contractual penalties if reliability declines more than they have predicted towards the end of the contract but it certainly isn't going to help passengers. About the only thing that would is either a seat guarantee scheme like LNER run or automatic compensation for short formed services (which would be absolutely wasteful for some services that are very quiet one way but are necessary for a later service using that formation.)

I do wonder if exactly the same unit mix and quantities were procured using a "traditional" lease rather than the IEP contract whether the short forming issues would be anything like as bad? You would still have issues with units needing exams being required to be in the right places for them but it would perhaps allow just enough flexibility to allow GWR control to be far more creative if necessary.

 

[irish_rail]

Which fundamentally shows that the short forming issue isn't ever likely to be resolved.

It might get better or worse depending on the particular issues the 800 or 802 units are having but eventually as the units age it is only going to get worse. I completely accept that Agility will end up with contractual penalties if reliability declines more than they have predicted towards the end of the contract but it certainly isn't going to help passengers. About the only thing that would is either a seat guarantee scheme like LNER run or automatic compensation for short formed services (which would be absolutely wasteful for some services that are very quiet one way but are necessary for a later service using that formation.)

I do wonder if exactly the same unit mix and quantities were procured using a "traditional" lease rather than the IEP contract whether the short forming issues would be anything like as bad? You would still have issues with units needing exams being required to be in the right places for them but it would perhaps allow just enough flexibility to allow GWR control to be far more creative if necessary.

Completely agree. This problem will never go away unless a decent proportion of 5 car sets get extended to 9s. This is unlikely to ever happen sadly.

 

[thelongestroad]

With the HSTs leaving and the 769s never entering traffic, it's going to be a cluster.. and it is already a cluster as it is. Thank goodness it can be resolved with GWR staf being GEMs.

 

[Envoy]

Surely, if the electrification had been completed to Bristol and Swansea it would have helped as electric traction is more reliable? (Obviously, full electrification of GWR land would be the ideal situation).

 

[Horizon22]

Yep! Although think this may have been seen as a convenient opportunity as it was cancelled between London and Reading anyways, so a train was taken off the Basingstoke service. There haven’t been any IET London short forms this evening.

There might also be some specific stuff strange happening in advance of tomorrow's strike also.

Which fundamentally shows that the short forming issue isn't ever likely to be resolved.

It might get better or worse depending on the particular issues the 800 or 802 units are having but eventually as the units age it is only going to get worse. I completely accept that Agility will end up with contractual penalties if reliability declines more than they have predicted towards the end of the contract but it certainly isn't going to help passengers. About the only thing that would is either a seat guarantee scheme like LNER run or automatic compensation for short formed services (which would be absolutely wasteful for some services that are very quiet one way but are necessary for a later service using that formation.)

Probably never no. That’s the start of it and you haven’t thrown in any severe disruption (where fleet requirements go somewhat out the window so that passengers can get moved) as well as whatever stock Hitachi are demanding at North Pole or Stoke Gifford that day at short-notice.

Most of the time there’s creative planning at Paddington (as that’s where almost every set ends up) to join, split, swap & run ECS throughout the day to try and get things in balance but it is often an uphill battle.

 

[irish_rail]

I know I've mentioned it before and get shouted down, but could some kind of exchange with LNER of SOME 9 car trains for some of GWRs 5 car sets, just to give a slightly fairer mix, as at present LNER do rather well for 9 car sets compared with GWR who have disproportionately too many 5s.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I know I've mentioned it before and get shouted down, but could some kind of exchange with LNER of SOME 9 car trains for some of GWRs 5 car sets, just to give a slightly fairer mix, as at present LNER do rather well for 9 car sets compared with GWR who have disproportionately too many 5s.

LNER only have 13 x 9 car class 800 sets, this is comparable with GWR’s 14 x 9 car 802s.

In a similar way to GWR uses the 9 car 802 on services into Cornwall where there are short platforms and stabling constraints LNER uses their 9 car class 800 sets on Highland services to Inverness and Aberdeen which are similar style Intercity services to Cornwall and I believe 10 cars are actually banned in the Highlands.

I’m not sure why you feel there is such an imbalance between 13 x 800 and 14 x 802 unless you are on about LNER’s 30 x 9 car 801s which are pure EMU so would be totally useless for GWR so form no useful comparison. You wouldn’t get one of these behind Newbury!! Maybe that is actually why you get shouted down because you suggest the impossible?

 

[Annetts key]

…unless you are on about LNER’s 30 x 9 car 801s which are pure EMU so would be totally useless for GWR so form no useful comparison.

Why would they be totally useless? GWR runs electric only 387s between London Paddington and Bristol Parkway. Assuming no OHL faults, electric only trains could run further to Cardiff Central. Indeed I believe 387s have run that far before.

Yes, diagrams may need to be altered. As obviously at the moment, the bi-modes run in ICE mode to operate services that are not on electrified lines.

 

[irish_rail]

Why would they be totally useless? GWR runs electric only 387s between London Paddington and Bristol Parkway. Assuming no OHL faults, electric only trains could run further to Cardiff Central. Indeed I believe 387s have run that far before.

Yes, diagrams may need to be altered. As obviously at the moment, the bi-modes run in ICE mode to operate services that are not on electrified lines.

Can't add anything to that. Where there's a will there's a way.

LNER only have 13 x 9 car class 800 sets, this is comparable with GWR’s 14 x 9 car 802s.

In a similar way to GWR uses the 9 car 802 on services into Cornwall where there are short platforms and stabling constraints LNER uses their 9 car class 800 sets on Highland services to Inverness and Aberdeen which are similar style Intercity services to Cornwall and I believe 10 cars are actually banned in the Highlands.

I’m not sure why you feel there is such an imbalance between 13 x 800 and 14 x 802 unless you are on about LNER’s 30 x 9 car 801s which are pure EMU so would be totally useless for GWR so form no useful comparison. You wouldn’t get one of these behind Newbury!! Maybe that is actually why you get shouted down because you suggest the impossible?

So LNER has 44 x 9 car sets compared with GWRs 35. I just don't buy that LNER can't let go of say 4 x 9 car 800s in exchange for say 5 or 6 5 car 802s. Still leaves them with 9 x 9 car sets to do the Inverness and Aberdeen trains. Yes a slight loss of capacity for LNER but that would hopefully be felt on the less busy services to Lincoln and the like.

 

[Benjwri]

Why would they be totally useless? GWR runs electric only 387s between London Paddington and Bristol Parkway. Assuming no OHL faults, electric only trains could run further to Cardiff Central. Indeed I believe 387s have run that far before.

Yes, diagrams may need to be altered. As obviously at the moment, the bi-modes run in ICE mode to operate services that are not on electrified lines.

What benefit are you getting from this swap? All you’re doing is you’re creating another sub fleet and losing flexibility. What happens when an 800 fails but only 801s are available in the depot?