Dipping into the BBC Local News revealed the following-

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-56902528

Perhaps some of our industry insiders have more information? It's just as well this has come to light (and hopefully will be resolved) in current circumstances when traffic is light.

 
It doesn't sound like anything more than you might expect from a new train.  A bit more detail here, with poster Clarence Yard explaining the situation very well (as always) on the second page...

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/gwr-withdraw-some-800s-due-to-cracks-in-yaw-damper-bolsters.216705/

 
If this was an isolated problem,  I would be at least somewhat forgiving.
However taken together with all the other faults and failures, these are starting to look pretty rubbish.

Failure to couple and uncouple reliably, despite this being an "essential requirement"
Failure to cope with the waves at Dawlish, also an "essential requirement"
Overheating in hot weather.
Poor ride.
Unreliable toilets.
Unreliable reservations.
Poor quality trim and fittings.

And a general failure to meet the required levels of availability that resulted in frequent short formations, forgotten about  with the reduced passenger numbers in the pandemic. But no doubt to return.

The poor standards of passenger comfort and facilities are arguably due to the TOC policy of "what downgrades can we get away with" and not Hitachi's fault, but still gives a poor impression.

 

I agree, this is a most serious failure IF the reports are accurate, which PERHAPS they are not.
I would expect reports in the national press, but not aware of any such.
And howls of outrage from the RMT, not aware of that either.

The opening or releasing of doors ONLY on the wrong side, might imply operator error, but the releasing of doors on BOTH sides suggests a serious defect as this AFAIK cant be done by mistake.

 
Roger Ford has an article in Modern Railways (next month's, presumably) about the repairs now being tested by Hitachi on 802007. This is available to read on line free but rationed. In his e-preview he says:

So the next thing to look out for is the decision to go ahead with repairs (or not!), and then the plan to do it, how many units will be out of the fleet at a time, and how long it's all going to take. And eventually whether it's really sorted the problem.

 
Note that the reports refers to the IETs as being "DMUs"  I seem to recall being criticized for referring to them thus, with IET supporters stating that they are not REALLY DMUs but actually something else.
It was suggested that DMU was a negative term that people linked with shorter trains, no catering, and general downgrading.

Moving on from that, I thought that new trains suffered from cracks in three locations, these proposed repairs would only seem to deal with only one such set of cracks.

I presume that hitachi are not paying any significant compensation for the ongoing lack of availability of these trains. Or providing some extra units free of charge to make up for this.

Meanwhile 5 car units instead of full length HSTs are the new normal, better get used to it, as Cross Country customers have got used to the reduced capacity of new trains.

 

I have heard reports of such an incident, I can’t remember if it was on GWR or another TOC. All doors released correctly on one side of the train but the TMS showed a door had also incorrectly released on the wrong side of the train. I can’t remember if door buttons armed or wether it was just a TMS glitch.

 

I did see 802007 out and about on a test run in January - you can see the modifications and sensors attached to them which were feeding an army of laptops and boffins information via cables that run through the adjacent doors.

 
ORR have published their final report, plus related material, on the Hitachi train cracking problems.

This does explain in some detail what happened, both in the organisations involved and in the train bodies. It doesn't address (and probably never could) some of the "why" questions, such as why the corrosion environment for Japanese trains does not lead to stress corrosion cracking. The contribution of track, as worn, and wheels, ditto, to the anti-roll bar and yaw damper motion and forces is also still a big vague.

The outcome is a six-year rolling repair plan for all the affected trains, including some bits (e.g. coupler mountings) where cracking was only found in the later more through investigations.

They also display a rather touching belief that more standards would prevent such things happening.

 
A SIX YEAR rolling program of repairs presumably means ANOTHER six years of short formed trains and reduced services. And that is optimistically presuming that the repair process runs smoothly and to time.

The rush to scrap existing stock means that opportunities to use alternative rolling stock will be very limited.

I cynically assume that Hitachi will not be paying compensation for their failure to meet the promised availability.

And after this multi year rectification process, they will still be nasty suburban units unsuited to inter city routes.

 

Obviously the more you do at once the shorter the overall time, and vice versa. The practical limit of units that can be under repair at a time is also obvious: one. The programme is described as:
That's four and a bit vehicles per week. For some reason the work is going to be done at Arlington Fleet Services at Eastleigh, where there will be two repair lines. Whether that means doing one five-car at a time in a week, or two units at once and taking longer, I can only guess. Further details revealed are:


True, but that's the world of fashion, isn't it?


I wonder. Obviously the whole repair programme is Hitachi's cost, and they have not been paid for trains not presented to the TOC as required in the TARA. But clearly a refund of the lease cost per diagram is inadequate compensation; it's not as if GWR can whip out their StockShop app and hire an alternative unit for the day. I imagine the TOCs (or in practice DfT) would have a legal case for breach of contract. That would depend on what's in the TARA and MARA, and I suspect in the blacked out bits.

 
Had most of the HSTs not been scrapped in such a hurry, then alternative trains WOULD have been available.

 
Presumably hitachi staff are not going on strike.
And will therefore be able to use the strike days to catch up on routine maintenance.
Over 30 short formations again today.

 
There were over-running engineering works in the BPW area earlier this morning which may well have affected the Hitachi depot

 
Nearly 40 half length IETs today, and not one comment on these forums. Presumably this is the new normal and not newsworthy. "new trains are shorter, get used to it"

05:23 London Paddington to Swansea due 08:58
05:51 Bristol Temple Meads to Portsmouth Harbour due 08:27
06:20 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington due 08:29
06:28 Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour due 09:53
07:31 Gloucester to Bristol Temple Meads due 08:27
07:33 Severn Beach to Weston-Super-Mare due 09:00
08:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 09:35
08:20 London Paddington to Oxford due 09:18
08:32 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 10:05
08:45 Great Malvern to Westbury due 11:32
09:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 10:39
09:10 Weston-Super-Mare to Severn Beach due 10:23
09:10 Bristol Temple Meads to Avonmouth due 09:39
09:23 Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central due 12:45
09:23 Swansea to London Paddington due 12:12
09:46 Avonmouth to Weston-Super-Mare due 11:00
09:59 Oxford to London Paddington due 10:54
10:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 11:36
10:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 12:08
11:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 12:38
11:20 London Paddington to Oxford due 12:13
12:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 13:39
12:31 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:06
12:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 15:31
13:02 Oxford to London Paddington due 13:54
13:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:35
14:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 15:36
14:18 London Paddington to Cardiff Central due 16:07
14:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 16:07
15:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 16:39
15:23 Swansea to London Paddington due 18:14
16:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 17:35
16:23 Swansea to London Paddington due 19:14
16:33 London Paddington to Taunton due 19:12
16:54 Cardiff Central to London Paddington due 18:44
17:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 18:40
18:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington due 20:08
18:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 21:33
19:18 London Paddington to Swansea due 22:17
19:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 22:34
20:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 23:50
0 Catering Updates

 

A long list agreed - but not all of those are IET services.

 
And, as usual, the list is now inaccurate.

 

From a passenger POV, the length of the train doesn't really matter - it's an implementation detail. What matters is whether you can get a seat or not.

 
Indeed.....

 
By chance there is a photo taken aboard the 10:00 ex Bristol Temple Meads on Twitter.

 

It's rather like mass cancellations every Sunday......initially it's so poor it's shocking, but gradually poor service becomes the normal expectation.

Great environment to assist with the resurgence  of COVID on the short formed train pictured too.

 
Worth noting that the first Class 80x has only just gone in for remedial work to repair the cracking problem.

 

Partly agree as this is indeed wildly dependent on implementation - which includes subtleties like "Avoid booking passengers into seats in the part of the train from which they cannot alight at their destination' and 'Activate the seat reservations before the train is at the platform at its starting station'.

There's also the instances when one half of a ten car set is heavily loaded and the other half with plenty of space - though as passengers have learned through experience at say Paddington, have they become more adept at putting themselves aboard on the half that has seats available? It's really difficult for the TOC to hit the balance.

Underlying this, travellers experiencing loading factors approaching or exceeding the seating capacity in any part of a run in a 5 car set will send the message that the system is capacity constrained, which will inhibit future growth in passenger numbers as people with a choice will use another travel mode - and others who are travelling with family, children or who have a disability may be heavily discouraged from using rail. With a capacity of just 290 or is it 254 seated in standard, an hourly 5 car IET on its own isn't a great heavy lifter.

At what level of occupancy does a TOC regard a long distance train as full to capacity? That's probably a different figure from the one at which a passenger would consider it full.

Mark

 

This is nothing new and not unique to ten car sets.  It happens often on 9-car sets, and used to happen often on HST's where passengers are/were able walk through the whole train.  I frequently see standing room only in 'J' and on the same train one man and his dog sat in 'A'. 

It even happens when crew make announcements pretty much pleading with people to move down the train...obviously a human behaviour thing.

 
The 12:31 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads was actually 9 coaches - I was on it.

 

1. It's interesting to see in places loadings along a train showing up on the platform displays showing where the space is. I recall it on Thameslink - so rarely on an an IET these days not sure if we have such a system like this on our London trains

2. Wasn't the "10 car scheme" on the Southern out of Cannon Street and Charing Cross to Hayes, Dartford and Sevenoaks something of a flop because the extra two carriages didn't get many passengers as they were so far from the terminal barriers (some bright spark suggesting that the two carriages should have been added at the London end!)

3.  I could not help wondering if the dog in your example was smelly or agressive (I know not - that it's a serious point)

 

I think two or three of the diagrams are now back to full length, so a dozen or so trains.  That’s not to say it’s not a bad day for IET availability, just like we have good and bad days for DMU availability as well.

Everyone can now check formations for themselves on RTT of course (100x more accurate than Journeycheck) so I won’t bother with a list.

 
Another bad IET day today. 31 short formations in total, of which 28 look to be half capacity IETs.
And AFAIK there were a few more short formations earlier today that have completed their journey and are therefore no longer shown.

And yes I am aware that IET advocates will point out that some might actually run full length, and that the odd bad day is to be expected.

 

Loadings are available on the GWR app (see Bob’s post from yesterday).  Perhaps in time that information will be available on the departure screens at stations?  Though I’m not sure it’ll be much use in terms of a live boarding situation at an origin station like Paddington.  Better for providing information at points en-route I’d have thought?

An advantage of the IETs over HSTs is that crew can use the passenger count facility and the live CCTV monitors to check where space is available and advise passengers.  Though like I said it’s rare for many to take heed of such advice.

The dog in my example was beautifully behaved. 

 
Veering slightly off topic, how are the loadings calculated?   Are there sensors as people pass through the doors or does it base things on the average weight of a passenger?   I am just thinking if someone boards in coach C but then walks through to coach B, how are the statistics calculated?

 
Providing loading information at stations might be useful, but is not an acceptable substitute for running full length trains.

If such information IS provided then will passengers with "booked train only" tickets be allowed to use a latter train at no extra expense ?
And if travel on a later GWR service IS allowed, what about connections onto non GWR services. Will Cross Country for example  allow passengers to use a later than booked train if the passenger misses the booked train due to overcrowding on the GWR service.

And what about travel EARLIER than otherwise permitted ?
Passenger has a ticket valid only after 09-30 and arrives at 09-00, in plenty of time for the 09-36 departure. At the station, the departure screen shows the 09-36 service as being full. The 09-18 train has plenty of room. Will the holder of the "only valid after 09-30" ticket be allowed on the 09-18 service under these conditions ?

 

The system was supplied by Petards, handily located in Gateshead. Their standard product is eyeTrain; this one may be the same or maybe customised. It has infrared sensors above each door that count every person going through - or at least try to. Obviously there is scope for error and ambiguity, especially with children and large dogs!

One thing that occurs to me is that there must be a "reset to zero" button to be pushed when the train is know to be empty (possibly by a software finger). When that happens, whatever count is present provides evidence the accumulated error. So somewhere there should be a log of those numbers - it would be interesting to know what they are!

 

I think it is done by measuring the total weight of each vehicle, and then assuming an average weight per passenger.
Probably assuming small healthy Japanese people and not overweight pie munching brits (pies not obtained on board of course, alternative pie vendors are available)

Edited to add, that it is done by actual counting and NOT by weight, see later posts.

 
Stuving is correct and Broadgage is incorrect.

Crew can do a reset to zero at any point they wish and as the train completes its journey it is usually reset to zero automatically.  What used to be an unreliable system is now much better, though isn't foolproof as it only takes a sensor to fail for the count to become inaccurate.

 

Yes indeed, the following departures from Paddington are currently listed as 5 vice 9/10 on JourneyCheck:

08:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 11:31
09:37 London Paddington to Paignton due 12:50
11:18 London Paddington to Cardiff Central due 13:17
13:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 14:35
13:32 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 15:08
15:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 18:33
16:18 London Paddington to Swansea due 19:21
17:02 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads due 18:40
17:32 London Paddington to Taunton due 20:14
17:36 London Paddington to Plymouth due 21:25
22:48 London Paddington to Swansea due 02:16

In reality, the following departures from Paddington are short formed:

09:37 London Paddington to Paignton due 12:50
17:36 London Paddington to Plymouth

So that's 2 instead of 11.

 
..and the 09:37 - which I plan to be on tomorrow - is showing on the app as lightly loaded despite being reduced to five coaches.

 
Some 45 short formed trains today...none of which are IET's. 

 

 

A symptom, perhaps, that we have a fair weather railway in which resources are pared down to a minimum.   If nothing goes wrong, there are enough resources to cover the advertised / contracted provision, but as soon as there's a glitch with IETs, signallers, Turbos, Train managers, booking office staff,  train drivers, or people who can fix points, things go "pear shaped" - sometimes VERY pear shaped!

In reality, short formed trains (IMHO) get relatively high publicity - some trains undoubtedly overcrowd as a result, but many don't; contraflow workings, and service tails, for example.  Cancellations / short workings far more important - looking back at yesterday, I note that only one train out of the six scheduled to serve Melksham after 4 p.m. actually did so ...

 
Eight shortformed trains listed on JourneyCheck out of Paddington for the remainder of the day.  In reality only one of them still is: 17:02 Paddington>Bristol TM.

 
Of all the trains to shortform on a Friday, this is probably the worst......

Facilities on the 19:04 London Paddington to Penzance due 00:35.

This is due to a fault on this train.
Will be formed of 5 coaches instead of 9.

 

I wonder if shortforming the 17:04 or 18:04 (both 10 cars today) would be even worse.  Haven't most people escaped London by 7 p.m., or do people hold back and use this train because of fare differentials?

 

Good job it isn’t shortformed then:  https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:W43522/2022-08-05/detailed#allox_id=0

 

Certainly, from the few times I've taken it, the 17 04 has been pretty quiet once the Pewsey contingent have got off.   That's the train with the most restrictions.  The 18 04 has fewer restrictions and is hence a fair bit busier but not like the late morning/middle of the day trains (again, in my limited experience).   Probably the way the stock works means the only choice for shortforming is unfortunately the 19 04.   

 

Which also means three others currently shown as shortformed on Journeycheck are in fact nine carriages.  13:00 and 17:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington and the 15:02 in the other direction. All formed with 800 310.

 

GWR Journey check still saying it's shortformed but good news if you're correct.

 

It still is, after the train has left Reading, where it was on the screens (and Tiger) as a 9-car. Ain't these modern computer thingies amazing?

 

Confirmed with a visual sighting.

The journeycheck entry was last updated at 05:20 I note.  Again, you have to question the point of it sometimes!

 


I go with the visual sighting.   The days of "Computer says, so must be right" are long passed - and especially so in this case where the computer feeds differ. RIRO on Journey check (Rubbish in, Rubbish out!)?

 

..and it is nine carriages.

 
As is the 13:03. Both trains, which would have been busy anyway, covering for the loss of the 12:36 to Paignton.

 
First time in a fair old while since I've been on a GWR IET.

Clean. Perfectly acceptable seat comfort. Quiet, comfortable ride with lovely cooling aircon. Reservations clearly marked. Well stocked trolley just passed. Clear PA announcements.

All the things to make for a relaxing, albeit short, journey from Bath to Swindon.

Great trains.

 
An Update on the automated on-board announcements on the Cotswold line.

Worcestershire parkway has now been added to the announcements. However a quiet male voice has been used in among the other stations announced in the usual loud female voice.
 
Yesterday I caught the early morning down Turbo service. On this the female voice announces all the stations including Worcestershire Parkway.

 

I can only assume you’ve mislaid your rose-tinted spectacles, Justin? 

 

Justin and I had a bet on who would respond first to that post.... and we lost.   

 

Morning journey across SWR & GWR with two connections went swimmingly.

GWR returning to form on my return journey. Planned connection at Westbury cancelled due to staff shortages (1F21 CDF - PMH). One hour plus delay. Next service to Salisbury very busy with aircon in one of the two units not working. Consequently other unit rammed. I'm sat on a lovely luggage rack (now - THAT is a hard uncomfortable seat, broadgage!) At least the aircon blower is directly above. Small mercies.

EDIT: And SWR doing their bit too. No aircon in either unit on 1754 from Salisbury to Exeter. Suspected that might be the case before boarding. Guard waiting on platform with crates of water. I suppose a job lot of bottled water is cheaper than actually fixing, or fitting reliable, aircon.

Dear SWR. Can we have some of those lovely air conditioned Hitachis for the WAT-EXDs please.

This is JayMac
reporting for the CoffeeShop
wilting in Wiltshire and sweating in Somerset.

 
European railway channel Nonstop Eurotrip has posted a review of a trip from CDF to PAD in first class on a Class 800:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_pE5sH62Vg

The general verdict at the end is 'good but not amazing'.

 
I noticed two parts (of the same set?) in Eastleigh works on Saturday. Does this mean something is happening?

 

I hope so! The modifications were seen on test in March and the "production" line was being set up at Eastleigh in around May. That suggests there should now be several treated units back in the fleet, but as I've not seen any pictures I suspect that can't be true. And I don't think they'll be running about unnoticed - the strengthening is quite chunky. It may be that there's been some tweaking of the add-ons for serial semi-industrial application, or some other delay.

 
Very familiar ...


Yesterday, several members attended GWR's central area timetable briefing and it was confirmed that IETs will take over 4 or 5 diagrams for Cardiff to Penzance services from December, retiring Castles.   Question raised as to where the IETs will come from, and it transpires that GWR are not at present running as many diagrams as they could be doing - there are spare IETs which could have been running the "super fasts".  It seems that the problems such as the one above are more due to the lack of 9 car units in the right places at the start of the day, and there could be enough 5 car units to run the Cardiff to Penzance service.   Question asked (not answered, I don't think) as to whether 1st class will be declassified for these journeys.

I would also need to look back at my notes from yesterday, but some main line changes which will see a return of the 2nd South Wales train in each hour on a Saturday - with Paddington to Cardiff services using electric units - class 387 rather than class 801.    As I read it, GWR has 33 x 387 units and with Crossrail taking over Heathrow and Reading services, there is some logic in this, though I wonder about the services being a bit slower (110 v 125 mph?) and wonder if 387s have things like catering capability.

 
Re declassification of Cardiff to Penzance IETs: Someone did answer the question, but the answer was ‘I don’t know, I’ll find out’

 

Now a 9-car.  Also very familiar…

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:W43450/2022-09-28/detailed#allox_id=0

 
I remain very doubtful as to the adequacy of the total available IET fleet to run the existing timetable reliably with full length trains, and even more doubtful about being able to operate extra services.

Despite all the previous promises we still see regular short formations.

Downgrading Cardiff services to class 387 or similar units will free up some IETs but enough ?

IETs were allegedly inter city trains, though many considered them a backward step. 387s and similar units are suburban trains and were never even claimed to be inter city, yet are becoming the norm on former inter city routes. Or is Cardiff now a suburb ?

 And what happened to the original plan that IETs could be converted to electric trains by removing all but one engine ?

 

Was it ever a ‘plan’ or just a statement of fact (that still stands) should an appropriate amount of the routes they serve become electrified? 

Realistically that would need to be Cardiff to Swansea and Chippenham/Bristol Parkway to Bristol Temple Meads at the very least.

 

What is the rationale behind this decision? Seems bonkers to me.

In June I went for a trip on one of the Castle sets and thought it was brilliant. They have been refurbished really well and it will be a retrograde step to retire (and presumably scrap) them.

 
Against the alternatives, Castle Class sets are expensive to run and expensive to maintain. That'll be the rationale for retiring what was always meant as a stop gap.

Not a retrograde step. Retrograde would be replacing them with something older. I love HSTs as much as the next enthusiast, but venerable doesn't necessarily equal practical or logical.

 
Plans for this have been in the pipeline since the report on the HST derailment at Carmont was published.

 
Did I notice several 9 down to 5 car units on IET's over this weekend?
Seemed to be more noticeable

 
I believe two castle diagrams are being replaced by IETs from the December timetable change.

 

That's a good idea. They will be able to run electric between Cardiff and Patchway, and hopefully into Temple Meads before they reach the end of the first two extensions to their working life.

 
This appeared on Twitter earlier - timeline for withdrawing the 2+4 HST sets

https://twitter.com/stpeterslayout/status/1596125590733611009?s=61&t=nVvvEwaf6JQqGCa5_84SIA

 
From jorneycheck
08:04 London Paddington to Penzance due 13:07
Facilities on the 08:04 London Paddington to Penzance due 13:07.
Catering is reduced in the front part of this train. Toilet facilities are not available at front. Disabled toilet facilities are reduced at front.
Additional Facilities Information
Below freezing temperatures have affected the water pipes on this train. No water is available for catering in the front part of this train, and therefore no hot drinks are available.

However, I note the 14;15 also has this note.  Would have thought the pipes would have unfrozen by midday!

 
I can't speak for the rest of the country but in Didcot the highest temperature it has been since Satuday is 0.3 C, with it being -10 C last night, so maybe it won't defrost today.

 
A traveller with LNER reports that their Leeds to London IEP service has had to halt as its 'horn is frozen'.

Mark

 
No hot drinks? No toilets?

They're taking the p!55. 

 

Love the Triang movement!

 

A frozen horn is a serious risk in this sort of weather. It can even become brittle and fall off if not kept properly warm. On trains, too.

 
Are these trains fit for anything?

 

Not much. Just moving people around the country at up to 125 mph.

 

As long is it's not hot, cold, too wet or too dry...........or Sunday (reliably).......or Autumn.......or they're cracked.....etc....etc.

 

...and there's somebody to drive it.

 

Certainly not today judging by the map/Journey check.

 
It’s Sunday. Sunday’s are run on rest day working / overtime. And there’s a ban on that type of work until January 2. Then 4 more days of strike action.

 

If the "up to" is anything like the adverts for broadband speeds .............................

 



I know it makes not one jot of difference to the passenger, but just to clarify:

1)  Most, if not all, cancellations today will be due to a shortage of Train Managers, not drivers.  There is no official action taking place, or announced, within ASLEF currently.
2)  Sunday's aren't technically run on rest day working/overtime, but it's fair to say they do rely on it to a certain amount.  Those Train Managers who have committed Sundays will still be expected to turn up to work, and the normal Sunday arrangements for drivers apply.  Nobody from RMT will be volunteering for additional Sundays or overtime outside their allocated shift or any of the other more subtle methods that usually get trains covered, which is why there are numerous cancellations today.

 

Ah ... "up to 17 trains calling every day" at my local station...
Current sequence ... 8, 15, 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 6 ...

 

Clarification appreciated, thank you ... I'm getting to be at the stage of being at a loss for words, though, at the frustration of what appear to passengers to be flaws in the current system such that the published timetable cannot be delivered in all but the rarest of circumstances.

How can WE - as passengers / a passenger group help all the players to make things better for customers, which I am going to define as making for a (more) reliable train service?

 

To be patient and weather the storm is the only option I guess?

The only good thing is that the ramping up of the industrial action from the RMT is unsustainable in anything but the short term, so either the Government/DfT or the Unions will break at some point and some sort of deal will be brokered.  The extent of the collateral damage caused in the meantime remains to be seen, but, speaking personally, it's a very difficult time to be a part of the railway industry, and worrying that so much is going wrong generally in the world at the moment.

 
Staff are starting to face a dilemma - the amount of earnings lost to strike action versus the likely amount of any pay rise actually obtained in the eventual settlement.

It seems that losses so far for an RMT member are approaching 2% of salary. The offer that has been made is 4%, so the question being asked is 'just how much more than 6% (4% plus the 'lost' 2%) are we likely to end up with, and is it worth continuing to lose further income?'

Pressure seemingly building on Mick. I suspect that is why he suggested needing a 'fast' settlement the other day.

 

Thank you, that is correct, and I am grateful. My comment should have read someone to do the non-driving part of the operation.

 
I’m not sure this has been mentioned on this thread - it is getting quite a few pages long now - but I would like to highlight the ride quality (actually the lack there of) of the IET.

This Saturday was an opportunity to go roaming across the Southern/Western region - where a total of 6 different types of stock was sampled. And the ride quality difference was marked.

By far the best was the Class 450 EMU - my first experience of these. The quality of ride across some lumpy and bumpy southern rails was remarkable - with more than one occurrence of such a smooth departure I was caught out from registering it taking place.

I was also taken aback of how big the inside of these units felt. A completely different feel from the IEP and its slight claustrophobic ambience with its inwards slanting sides (ala Class 222). I wished I had a tape measure to do a more scientific comparison!

Back to my point - with two new relatively new class types why is there such a difference in ‘standards’ - is it’s down solely to manufacturers doctrine / preference.

I know I might be accused of comparing apples with pears - but London to Southampton is not vastly different from London to Bristol with similar stopping patterns at major centres. The only plus point for the IET I could note was that it had, it seemed, better acceleration than its EMU brethren.

 
There’s little point making comparisons on ride quality unless it’s on the same track, the same relative position within the carriage, and at the same speed.

 
And the same seats the lack of padding in places in the Fainsa seats on a Class 8xx probably exacerbates or magnifies any bumps. I now travel with a cushion.

 
Just to add this train crew notice to further explain my previous post, and perhaps it might explain your poor ride quality experience?  Even if you weren’t on this particular bit of track it shows how it might be the track and not the train that’s responsible.

 
Very interesting post on journeycheck today (8th February)
https://www.journeycheck.com/greatwesternrailway/
08:50 Penzance to Cardiff Central due 14:20
Facilities on the 08:50 Penzance to Cardiff Central due 14:20.
This is due to more trains than usual needing repairs at the same time.
Will be formed of 9 coaches instead of 5.

Bonus upgrade!
Usually second class only,  and nine coaches including first.

Welcome upgrade to that service.
Only applies to perhaps one service today, but...

 
Could happen more often as the Castle sets are withdrawn.

 
Looks like it's only a 5-car (800007) and is actually booked for an IET all week and formed off the 06:39 from PLY.  

It then goes on to work the 15:00 CDF-TAU, 17:11 TAU-CDF, 20:00 CDF-TAU and 22:44 TAU-BRI.

 
Seem to be a few more toilet issues over the last few days.
Seemingly not being fixed overnight, and now a few other units having the same problem.
(Noted from journeycheck)

 

I’m not sure there are more issues, just that they are now being listed on journeycheck when a single toilet is out of use?

We seem to go through these little fads of reporting new things on journeycheck with little consistency over time, so perhaps such detail won’t last long.

I’m not sure such detail is especially helpful anyway.  A reduction of one toilet (or even two) on an IET isn’t likely to cause many issues.  More than that and yes it is useful information, or if it’s one of the Universal Access Toilets.  Also on shorter non IET stock where there are only one or two toilets fitted.  But dozens of listings for a single toilet out on a 9-car set?  Unnecessary IMHO.

 
Yesterday I had an unexpected journey on a Castle class; Berry Pomeroy Castle, I think it was. This was from Gloucester to Bristol Temple Meads on the service that usually comes from Worcester, but yesterday was starting from Gloucester due to engineering works, and is usually some sort of 3-car DMU. Whatever you think of IET seats, the ride quality compared to a Castle does show the benefit of 45 or so years' development of suspension. And whether or not the thrum of the underfloor engines disturbs you when they're running, the carriages themselves are so much quieter than the Castles, which make an assortment of squeaks, bumps and rattles. However, the Castle class guard's van cycle space beats anything on an IET hands down!

 

With the greatest of respect you clearly have not been around sharp/sharpish curves such as just to the west of Dawlish Warren and between Dainton and Totnes  where these IETs bogies negotiate in a series of straight jerks compared  to the seamless flow experienced on HSTs.
Also depending where you are ( uncomfortably ) seated in an IET the noise and rattles from bogies can at times be alarming.