REALTRACK models announce Class 143 and Class 144

[royaloak]

49 minutes ago, DRS Crewe On A Mission said:

Hi all, 

 

Just a thought and a quick question as I don't have much knowledge about the FGW/GWR 143s. Was their any one time when some 143s were still in FGW Local Lines livery whilst others were in the new GWR green livery? If so what sort of time span was this across? I ask because depending on what 142s are announced I may buy x1 FGW Local Lines and x1 GWR green and run them at the same time if it was prototypical at some stage for the two liveries to be in use at the same time. Better still was their any formations with two or more 143s running together that included both liveries? 

 

Thank you very much in advance. 

 

Kind Regards, 

 

Danny. 

Bearing in mind we still have FGW blue 165s, 166s and HSTs it did happen quite quickly, over about 6-9 months if memory serves.

 

Any formation could be put into service depending what was working and on some occasions not working (failed cab equipment needing to be 'boxed in' etc), livery never got a look in, so 143/150 143/143, 143/153 and occasionally 143/158 on Paignton to Exmouths, and yes it was a booked formation for a few months.

Edited December 3, 2019 by royaloak

[DRS Crewe On A Mission]

12 hours ago, royaloak said:

Bearing in mind we still have FGW blue 165s, 166s and HSTs it did happen quite quickly, over about 6-9 months if memory serves.

 

Any formation could be put into service depending what was working and on some occasions not working (failed cab equipment needing to be 'boxed in' etc), livery never got a look in, so 143/150 143/143, 143/153 and occasionally 143/158 on Paignton to Exmouths, and yes it was a booked formation for a few months.

 

Hi, 

 

Thank you for the reply and the info. I really appreciate it. 

 

That's brilliant. I just like (to an extent) to be as prototypical as possible. So now I could potentially mix FGW & GWR either as separate trains or as one formation. Out of the five numbers that Charlie and Aaron have announced (603, 612, 617, 620 & 621) were any of them restricted to any particular routes or diagrams or did these five really work any route or diagram on the Paignton/Exmouth services? I aren't too fussed about the running numbers but I would just prefer to know if any of these five were more or less likely to work together. 

 

I ask purely out of interest because in Yorkshire with the Northern 142s & 144s you can quite regularly see the same units on specific routes, diagrams and lines, resulting in other units making less appearances on specific routes. On the Leeds/Sheffield and Sheffield/Leeds services that I use regularly you will often see 144014-144023 used which are the three car 144s as opposed to 144001-144013 which are the two car units. You rarely see the two car 144s on this route unless their is a lack of availability with the three car 144s. 

 

Thank you very much in advance. 

 

Kind Regards, 

 

Danny. 

[royaloak]

As the Pacers are based at Exeter and only Exeter based Drivers and Guards sign them now, they are basically glued to the Triangle of Doom (Barnstaple, Exmouth and Paignton)  with occasional out and backs to Plymouth and Bristol and very occasionally Penzance, they also visit both Bristol and Plymouth if tyre turning or maintenance is required and Exeter depot cannot accommodate it while it is rebuilt.

 

They do have booked diagrams but on the day allocations can throw anything on any diagram, although there are a few diagram which MUST be a certain type of unit or one which is fully fuelled etc that doesnt really apply to the 143s.

[DRS Crewe On A Mission]

15 hours ago, royaloak said:

As the Pacers are based at Exeter and only Exeter based Drivers and Guards sign them now, they are basically glued to the Triangle of Doom (Barnstaple, Exmouth and Paignton)  with occasional out and backs to Plymouth and Bristol and very occasionally Penzance, they also visit both Bristol and Plymouth if tyre turning or maintenance is required and Exeter depot cannot accommodate it while it is rebuilt.

 

They do have booked diagrams but on the day allocations can throw anything on any diagram, although there are a few diagram which MUST be a certain type of unit or one which is fully fuelled etc that doesnt really apply to the 143s.

 

Thanks for the reply and the info. I have used the info that you have told me and searched for the 143s on Flickr and YouTube. It seems that the FGW/now GWR eight 143s are near enough permanently glued to the Barnstaple, Exmouth & Paignton diagrams. I even stumbled across one video also straight away which showed a compilation of the eight 143s throughout 2017 which showed them in FGW livery at the start of the year and GWR green at the end of the year. The video suggests that all eight repaints took place during the three Summer months (June, July & August) because by September all eight wore GWR green. I have also found occasions where as you say an FGW 143 was coupled to a GWR green 143, so it did happen on various occasions with 153s in GWR been mixed in as well. So yes their is plenty of scope and options with the five 143s that Charlie & Aaron have announced. 

 

Do you happen to know how many of the eight 143s are required on a daily basis for the Barnstaple, Exmouth & Paignton diagrams? Is it all eight or is say six/seven with one or two examples on maintenance/repair? 

 

Thank you very much in advance. 

 

Kind Regards, 

 

Danny. 

[royaloak]

22 hours ago, DRS Crewe On A Mission said:

Do you happen to know how many of the eight 143s are required on a daily basis for the Barnstaple, Exmouth & Paignton diagrams? Is it all eight or is say six/seven with one or two examples on maintenance/repair? 

When I was based at Exeter it was 6 out of 8 but they were normally short of a 150 for one reason or another so if there was a spare one it would be put on one of the 150 diagrams in the Exeter area, it was very rare for there to be a unit sat spare simply because we never had enough units, if it was serviceable it was in service, if something was sat on the depot it was either awaiting repair/parts or undergoing repairs, when a unit came off repair it normally replaced an in service unit which needed repair, there was nearly always something which needed doing.

[DRS Crewe On A Mission]

12 hours ago, royaloak said:

When I was based at Exeter it was 6 out of 8 but they were normally short of a 150 for one reason or another so if there was a spare one it would be put on one of the 150 diagrams in the Exeter area, it was very rare for there to be a unit sat spare simply because we never had enough units, if it was serviceable it was in service, if something was sat on the depot it was either awaiting repair/parts or undergoing repairs, when a unit came off repair it normally replaced an in service unit which needed repair, there was nearly always something which needed doing.

 

Thanks again for the reply and the info. Most useful to know by someone who was based at the depot. I am hoping that I can afford to buy the FGW & GWR 143s as well because they do sound fairly straight forward to model because they stick to specific routes and diagrams, they are based at one depot and in 2017 especially their was a really mixture of liveries and formations. That has to be one of the most easiest loco fleets to model and both liveries on the 143 available from the same manufacturer, Realtrack. Brilliant. 

 

Another little question I have (sorry to be a pain) is what stations are on the Barnstaple, Exmouth, Paignton route please? If their are too many to list please could you give me an example of a headcode for a train and then I should be able to find the stations on the route?

 

Also do you know how many diagrams their are for the FGW & GWR 143s working back and fourth on the Barnstaple, Exmouth and Paignton route? I ask because on some photos and videos some formations/workings on the route have several units attached whilst others appear to have just one solo unit on the working. 

 

Any help with the stations and diagrams would be really appreciated. 

 

Thank you very much in advance. 

 

Kind Regards, 

 

Danny. 

 

[royaloak]

2 hours ago, DRS Crewe On A Mission said:

Also do you know how many diagrams their are for the FGW & GWR 143s working back and fourth on the Barnstaple, Exmouth and Paignton route? I ask because on some photos and videos some formations/workings on the route have several units attached whilst others appear to have just one solo unit on the working. 

 

Any help with the stations and diagrams would be really appreciated. 

 

That is a minefield,

 

<basic info>

every unit is one diagram, where 2 units are coupled together that is 2 units on 2 diagrams working 1 service.

There are a few AM only and a few PM only diagrams, these can be covered by the same unit or different ones depending on what repairs or exams are being carried out. (The exception is 3 car 150 below)

 

Right-

Some services are 2 units coupled together all day (useful for units with cab defects as they can be 'boxed in' in the middle of the set, this would have a multi only restriction applied to that cab to ensure they arent split). Also useful if one of them is non multi as that cab can be an outer one and if it suffers a failure it already has its rescue unit attached.

 

Others start as 2 coupled and then split at some stage and go their separate ways, sometimes onto 2 different services or sometimes one will go onto the depot for a few hours 'rest', this can also be one which has a few quick jobs which need doing so is deliberately put on that diagram so they can repair it during the down time, this will then come back out later in the day either to cover continue its own diagram if its a full day one or a PM diagram.

 

Others are single units all day and they try to keep the reliable units on these although it doesnt always work out.

 

Sometimes a 3 car 158  would be unavailable so the 3 car 150 would cover that diagram and a 150 and 153 would cover for the 3 car 150, in this case one unit would use the normal diagram number (say PM526) and the other unit would be given PM5261, so it was obvious at a glance why they were together and not to split them unless absolutely necessary as they would be working busy trains later. This is the exception to to 1 unit on 1 diagram because both units would be on the 1 diagram.

 

Then we get onto units which dont like each other, yep there are some that dont play when coupled to certain other units, and that has to be kept in mind when doing the morning allocation because you dont want these on diagrams which couple later in the day.

 

We had 1 service which started off as 2x143, went down to 1x143 after the morning Peak (other to depot), then early afternoon the second one re-attached to go the Exmouth (2x143) and on arrival back to Exeter a 150 attached to go to Paignton making it 4x143+2x150, the school special, then on arrival back at Exeter the 150 was detached before running up the Central to start the evening Peak Paignton, I have seen some weird and wonderful formations on this including a 3 car 158 and a 2 car 143.

 

As you can see diagramming is just so easy, not!

 

As for the stops its easiest to check realtimetrains (other sites available) and click on the services, they can vary but its basically all the stopping services.

 

Edited December 6, 2019 by royaloak

[mdvle]

2 hours ago, DRS Crewe On A Mission said:

Another little question I have (sorry to be a pain) is what stations are on the Barnstaple, Exmouth, Paignton route please? If their are too many to list please could you give me an example of a headcode for a train and then I should be able to find the stations on the route?

 

Simply go to gwr.com and select Exeter to any of the endpoints, choose an available train, and then you can list all the calling points.  Wikipedia can also be useful, it will often have an entry for each line.

 

Though from memory I can tell you Exeter -> Paignton is Exter St. Davids, Exeter St. Thomas, Starcross, Dawlish Warren, Dawlish, Teignmouth, Newton Abbot, Torre, Torquay, Paignton.

 

 

2 hours ago, DRS Crewe On A Mission said:

Also do you know how many diagrams their are for the FGW & GWR 143s working back and fourth on the Barnstaple, Exmouth and Paignton route? I ask because on some photos and videos some formations/workings on the route have several units attached whilst others appear to have just one solo unit on the working.

 

Suspect it will be best to make notes from a timetable, though note big changes are coming December 15th.  Then compare with photos and video to see what actually was used vs what was planned.

[mdvle]

2 hours ago, DRS Crewe On A Mission said:

Another little question I have (sorry to be a pain) is what stations are on the Barnstaple, Exmouth, Paignton route please? If their are too many to list please could you give me an example of a headcode for a train and then I should be able to find the stations on the route?

 

On the assumption you are looking for a station(s) to model, some generalities.

 

Exeter St. D to Newton Abbot is obviously a busy route that in addition to Paignton trains carries all the stuff to Plymouth and Cornwall.  Exeter St. Thomas, Starcross and Dawlish Warren are only served by local trains, and it is possible some Plymouth/Cornwall trains may not stop at Dawlish or Teignmouth.

 

Newton Abbot -> Paignton is quieter, though still has (per gwr.com) 2 direct services to Paddington m-f which I assume at this point are Class 80x, though would have been HST in the past.  Also in summer get the steam specials running to Kingswear via the Dartmouth Steam Railway.  London trains don't stop at Torre.

 

Also, there are plans (currently shelved) for a new station between Torre and Newton Abbot (called Edginswell) if you want something more modern looking/simple and willing to speculate.  There are drawings around but the station has no funding to be built currently.

 

Exeter Central (on Exeter St. D -> Exmouth get the Waterloo - Exeter Trains, I would guess Exmouth Jct to Exmouth is all just the local services.

 

Exeter St. D to Barnstaple is mainly going to be local services with perhaps still some freight(?).

 

Edited December 6, 2019 by mdvle

[DRS Crewe On A Mission]

5 minutes ago, royaloak said:

That is a minefield,

 

<basic info>

every unit is one diagram (except for see 3 car 150 below), where 2 units are coupled together that is 2 units on 2 diagrams working 1 service.

There are a few AM only and a few PM only diagrams, these can be covered by the same unit or different ones depending on what repairs or exams are being carried out.

 

Right-

Some services are 2 units coupled together all day (useful for units with cab defects as they can be 'boxed in' in the middle of the set, this would have a multi only restriction applied to that cab to ensure they arent split). Also useful if one of them is non multi as that cab can be an outer one and if it suffers a failure it already has its rescue unit attached.

 

Others start as 2 coupled and then split at some stage and go their separate ways, sometimes onto 2 different services or sometimes one will go onto the depot for a few hours 'rest', this can also be one which has a few quick jobs which need doing so is deliberately put on that diagram so they can repair it during the down time, this will then come back out later in the day either to cover continue its own diagram if its a full day one or a PM diagram.

 

Others are single units all day and they try to keep the reliable units on these although it doesnt always work out.

 

Sometimes a 3 car 158  would be unavailable so the 3 car 150 would cover that diagram and a 150 and 153 would cover for the 3 car ,150

in this case one unit would use the normal diagram number (say PM526) and the other unit would be given PM5261, so it was obvious at a glance why they were together and not to split them unless absolutely necessary as they would be working busy trains later. This is the exception to to 1 unit on 1 diagram because both units would be on the 1 diagram.

 

Then we get onto units which dont like each other, yep there are some that dont play when coupled to certain other units, and that has to be kept in mind when doing the morning allocation because you dont want these on diagrams which couple later in the day.

 

We had 1 service which started off as 2x143, went down to 1x143 after the morning Peak (other to depot), then early afternoon the second one re-attached to go the Exmouth (2x143) and on arrival back to Exeter a 150 attached to go to Paignton making it 4x143+2x150, the school special, then on arrival back at Exeter the 150 was detached before running up the Central to start the evening Peak Paignton, I have seen some weird and wonderful formations on this including a 3 car 158 and a 2 car 143.

 

As you can see diagramming is just so easy, not!

 

 

Thank you for the very detailed reply. I really appreciate it. 

 

It's really interesting to see how a small fleet of eight FGW/GWR 143s operate during different workings, diagrams, times of the day. It's also interesting to find out about 150s and 158s coupled to 143s. In Yorkshire we have 142s and 144s, thus no 143s but I have rarely seen a 142 or 144 coupled with a 158. The Leeds/Sheffield and return Northern pacers that I regularly travel on are usually just solo pacers due to a shortage of carriages, so we are rarely privileged with two pacers together let alone a pacer with a 150 or a 158. 

 

It's easy to see the challenges that you and others faced when working at the depot, doing the allocations and diagrams etc. With such a small fleet of old 143s that do not like interacting with certain other members of the class when working in multi must have proven really challenging, especially since you are always going to have at least one or two on repairs/maintenance. 

 

The 150s and 158s working with 143s is exceptional info to have been given because I may even decide to buy the GWR 150 by Bachmann if I have the money in order to create some of the more wacky but not unusual workings within the fleet. 

 

I must say the FGW & GWR liveries are really nice. I believe they are some of the nicest modern colours/liveries on today's units. The Northern livery is nice on the pacers but the curves on a fairly box/rectangular shaped unit does look slightly out of place sometimes. 

 

Thank you very much for all of the info that you have provided. I really appreciate it. 

 

4 minutes ago, mdvle said:

 

Simply go to gwr.com and select Exeter to any of the endpoints, choose an available train, and then you can list all the calling points.  Wikipedia can also be useful, it will often have an entry for each line.

 

Though from memory I can tell you Exeter -> Paignton is Exter St. Davids, Exeter St. Thomas, Starcross, Dawlish Warren, Dawlish, Teignmouth, Newton Abbot, Torre, Torquay, Paignton.

 

 

 

Suspect it will be best to make notes from a timetable, though note big changes are coming December 15th.  Then compare with photos and video to see what actually was used vs what was planned.

 

Thank you for the reply and info. I really appreciate it. 

 

I didn't know that GWR had the stations listed for routes on their website. I will take a look. Thanks for the station list of that particular route. Yes I will take a look at the routes and timetables etc and I will be sure to check after the upcoming timetable change. As you say it would be good to compare changes and differences etc. 

 

Thanks again. 

[DRS Crewe On A Mission]

6 minutes ago, mdvle said:

 

On the assumption you are looking for a station(s) to model, some generalities.

 

Exeter St. D to Newton Abbot is obviously a busy route that in addition to Paignton trains carries all the stuff to Plymouth and Cornwall.

 

Newton Abbot -> Paignton is quieter, though still has (per gwr.com) 2 direct services to Paddington m-f which I assume at this point are Class 80x, though would have been HST in the past.  Also in summer get the steam specials running to Kingswear via the Dartmouth Steam Railway.

 

Exeter Central (on Exeter St. D -> Exmouth get the Waterloo - Exeter Trains, I would guess Exmouth Jct to Exmouth is all just the local services.

 

Exeter St. D to Branstaple is mainly going to be local services with perhaps still some freight(?).

 

 

Thank you for the reply and info. 

 

I am mainly interested in the areas and routes that the 143 pacers operate although I am also interested in the operation of other GWR locos and their operations. From what you mention I think my main interest is the Exeter St David's to Newton Abbot and Exeter St David's to Barnstaple. Whilst I like the HSTs, I do also like the local stopper services (143s) which operate on these two routes. 

[royaloak]

7 minutes ago, DRS Crewe On A Mission said:

It's easy to see the challenges that you and others faced when working at the depot, doing the allocations and diagrams etc. With such a small fleet of old 143s that do not like interacting with certain other members of the class when working in multi must have proven really challenging, especially since you are always going to have at least one or two on repairs/maintenance. 

 

The 150s and 158s working with 143s is exceptional info to have been given because I may even decide to buy the GWR 150 by Bachmann if I have the money in order to create some of the more wacky but not unusual workings within the fleet. 

 

I had the easy job, I just had to drive them, the units that dont like each other doesnt happen very often but it was mainly the 150s which gave issues so one would be sent to Bristol and other stayed around Exeter (or Bristol kept one and sent the other to Exeter), normally after a couple of weeks the fault would fix itself and everything would be fine, with the 143s being kept local any silliness with them was quickly sorted out either by giving them a stern talking too or hitting them with a big hammer.

[DRS Crewe On A Mission]

10 hours ago, royaloak said:

I had the easy job, I just had to drive them, the units that dont like each other doesnt happen very often but it was mainly the 150s which gave issues so one would be sent to Bristol and other stayed around Exeter (or Bristol kept one and sent the other to Exeter), normally after a couple of weeks the fault would fix itself and everything would be fine, with the 143s being kept local any silliness with them was quickly sorted out either by giving them a stern talking too or hitting them with a big hammer.

 

You're very fortunate to have such a good and interesting job. Out of the 143s, 150s and 158s what was your favourite to drive? I suppose it was a bonus that the 150s could be sent elsewhere to operate on different diagrams leaving you with the 143s that were fairly reliable when the 150s were not involved. Funny you should mention pacers and a large hammer. I'm sure this isn't the first story that I have heard about pacers been hit with one thing or another to get them working again haha. 

 

I also read a few weeks ago that all eight of the GWR 143s will continue to see use into 2020, which from an enthusiasts point of view is good but I'm not sure that the passengers will agree. Interesting I didn't see anything about the traction that will be cascaded to replace them. 

[royaloak]

I am indeed, the unit I enjoyed driving the most was the 143 because they had such a spacious cab and make a nice smooth (I am not the quickest but I will get you there) noise, then it was 158s simply because we didnt get to drive them very often, not that there was anything wrong with any of the others, I dont mind what I am driving really although I do find the IETs a bit boring. As one of my colleagues said, I get paid to enjoy my hobby, and I cant argue with that.

 

The 143s are continuing in service but will have to be coupled to a 150 so the 'train' is PRM compliant, just like I posted months ago but others said I was wrong and that wasnt allowed. I just wish they would fit them with quieter saloon heaters, that would improve the travelling experience no end.

Edited December 6, 2019 by royaloak
add <saloon> for clarification.

[DRS Crewe On A Mission]

15 minutes ago, royaloak said:

I am indeed, the unit I enjoyed driving the most was the 143 because they had such a spacious cab and make a nice smooth (I am not the quickest but I will get you there) noise, then it was 158s simply because we didnt get to drive them very often, not that there was anything wrong with any of the others, I dont mind what I am driving really although I do find the IETs a bit boring. As one of my colleagues said, I get paid to enjoy my hobby, and I cant argue with that.

 

The 143s are continuing in service but will have to be coupled to a 150 so the 'train' is PRM compliant, just like I posted months ago but others said I was wrong and that wasnt allowed. I just wish they would fit them with quieter saloon heaters, that would improve the travelling experience no end.

 

I have to say I do like the noise of the pacers, especially when departing after stopping. The smooth noise which is constant for a good few seconds until further power is applied is nice. I haven't been inside a pacer cab before but I have been pretty close to one when cramped on an evening peak service to Sheffield and they do look quite spacious even when a second member of train crew is in the cab too. That's very true. I do wish that I was a train driver or train manager which now appears to be the more appropriate name. 

 

That's the one coupled to a 150. I think a similar arrangement is happening at Northern and Transport For Wales with pacers needing to be coupled to a 150 or 158 for Northern and 158 for TFW. It will be interesting to see how long the eight GWR pacers continue in service going into 2020 especially when needing to be coupled to a 150. Trying to think of what units may be replacing them. I know that the ex GA 153s & 170s are going to TFW, the ex GA 156s are going to EMR, the ex LNER HSTs are also going to EMR thus their will be none spare for any 2+4 or 2+5 Castle sets alike some other GWR and now ScotRail. Very interesting times in the railways at the moment. 

[royaloak]

GWR tried to get another 3 Castle sets but DaFT said no, there has been a bit of chatter about hiring some to TfW but that has gone very quiet now.

Edited December 6, 2019 by royaloak

[DRS Crewe On A Mission]

7 hours ago, royaloak said:

GWR tried to get another 3 Castle sets but DaFT said no, there has been a bit of chatter about hiring some to TfW but that has gone very quiet now.

 

Very interesting. Wouldn't it be interesting seeing ex FGW/GWR 2+8 or 2+9 HSTs as shorter 2+4 or 2+5 Castle Sets replacing two car 143 pacers on the same routes/diagrams. 

 

Something that could be problematic is what happens say when eight or so 150s aren't available to couple to the 143s to work the diagrams? Considering that as you said above, previously 150s were sometimes taken off of the diagrams with 143s when they used to play up for example but put onto other workings. But when their will be a need to have not just 150s serviceable to work with the 143s but also have them compatible for these formations could make things interesting. Especially with it been the 150s that have caused a few problems before. 

[royaloak]

The train will be cancelled, everyone has to be treated equally from 01/01/2020 so if there isnt a toilet for the wheelchair passenger the train has to be cancelled, there would still be a place for the wheelchair passenger but that doesnt matter.

[LBRJ]

1 hour ago, royaloak said:

The train will be cancelled, everyone has to be treated equally from 01/01/2020 so if there isnt a toilet for the wheelchair passenger the train has to be cancelled, there would still be a place for the wheelchair passenger but that doesnt matter.

 

There does not appear to be a "genuinely scary" button to press but I long thought it would come to this.

Back in the day  i could have probs told you the name of each and all of our regular wheelchair bound passengers; and they were of the opinion that it would be they would suffer from future plans...

[mdvle]

1 hour ago, royaloak said:

The train will be cancelled, everyone has to be treated equally from 01/01/2020 so if there isnt a toilet for the wheelchair passenger the train has to be cancelled, there would still be a place for the wheelchair passenger but that doesnt matter.

 

I guess part of the reasoning will be to encourage the TOC to have a functioning unit with a disabled toilet working - if they could just substitute running a train without the toilet then it could be tempting to treat it as a regular everyday option instead of just an exceptional occurrence.

[royaloak]

4 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

I guess part of the reasoning will be to encourage the TOC to have a functioning unit with a disabled toilet working - if they could just substitute running a train without the toilet then it could be tempting to treat it as a regular everyd.ay option instead of just an exceptional occurrence.

In any sensible industry the train would run but the TOC would be penalised for running a non compliant train, but as the railway have had 10 or more years to get things sorted out that wont happen.

 

Of course the real rogues here are the DaFT who should have started the ball rolling years ago on procurement and modification but they didnt, they left it until the last possible minute so millions/billions has had to be thrown at the problem to try and build/modify the trains in time, but of course it is 'the railway' who will get the blame including from the DaFT so they can be seen to be hard on the nasty TOCs who dragged their feet.

 

EDit-

The funny thing is it is fine for a train to be in service with a defective toilet, or not have a toilet at all, but not okay if it has a working non compliant toilet (do I see a way around it )?

Edited December 7, 2019 by royaloak

[MrJack47790]

31 minutes ago, royaloak said:

In any sensible industry the train would run but the TOC would be penalised for running a non compliant train, but as the railway have had 10 or more years to get things sorted out that wont happen.

 

Of course the real rogues here are the DaFT who should have started the ball rolling years ago on procurement and modification but they didnt, they left it until the last possible minute so millions/billions has had to be thrown at the problem to try and build/modify the trains in time, but of course it is 'the railway' who will get the blame including from the DaFT so they can be seen to be hard on the nasty TOCs who dragged their feet.

 

EDit-

The funny thing is it is fine for a train to be in service with a defective toilet, or not have a toilet at all, but not okay if it has a working non compliant toilet (do I see a way around it )?

I was on a northern rail class 170 for 2 hours but there was no functioning toilet but the train still ran.

[Afroal05]

On 06/12/2019 at 00:43, DRS Crewe On A Mission said:

 

It's really interesting to see how a small fleet of eight FGW/GWR 143s operate during different workings, diagrams, times of the day. It's also interesting to find out about 150s and 158s coupled to 143s. 

 

Today for example there are 7 out of 8 143s available for traffic (619 needs new wheelsets.)

There are 5x 143 diagrams but all 7 are being used in traffic as today there is a shortage of working 150s at Exeter. The 150 diagrams they have been put on will just be Barnstaple/Exmouth/Paignton workings - the diagram that goes to Gunnislake for example has to be a 150 - which means that really you need to allocate the 143s first and then allocate the rest afterwards.

 

At the moment a 158 on the Devon branchlines cannot be coupled to anything else, this is due to platform lengths in a couple of locations I think. But hypothetically there is no reason a 143 couldn't be coupled to a 158 on the mainline.  

 

On 06/12/2019 at 00:43, DRS Crewe On A Mission said:

 

It's easy to see the challenges that you and others faced when working at the depot, doing the allocations and diagrams etc. With such a small fleet of old 143s that do not like interacting with certain other members of the class when working in multi must have proven really challenging, especially since you are always going to have at least one or two on repairs/maintenance. 

 

 

A pair of 143s generally seems to be fine coupled together but there are definitely more issues when a 143+150 are together, not a lot more but enough that it isn't a surprise when maintenance advise you there is some kind of issue on a service.

 

6 hours ago, DRS Crewe On A Mission said:

 

Something that could be problematic is what happens say when eight or so 150s aren't available to couple to the 143s to work the diagrams?

 

The hope is that with the 150 fleet being based out of Exeter this shouldn't be an issue. I say shouldn't...

[royaloak]

6 hours ago, MrJack47790 said:

I was on a northern rail class 170 for 2 hours but there was no functioning toilet but the train still ran.

Yeah it would, the legislation doesnt start until the 1st of January.

Was it a PRM compliant toilet?

[DRS Crewe On A Mission]

16 hours ago, royaloak said:

The train will be cancelled, everyone has to be treated equally from 01/01/2020 so if there isnt a toilet for the wheelchair passenger the train has to be cancelled, there would still be a place for the wheelchair passenger but that doesnt matter.

 

That's really good to know and thank you for continually providing an insight into the railways. I really appreciate it. I appreciate that everyone should be treated fairly and thus not discriminated against but surely that will do more harm than good for passengers with physical disabilities. I mention this because on Twitter recently some passengers have given an 'inside look' from their perspectives about the difficulties when having a physical disability and trying to travel on the railways. From stations not having ramps and just having stairs to the train operating company not meeting their needs when getting on and off trains to the replacement bus/coach situation that some operators impose on passengers which means that those with physical disabilities can't get on them and travel as opposed to getting the train. Thus weekend engineering works and the bus/coach situation in relation to the railways causes no end of problems. I have to say I was shocked and upset at the amount of challenges that people with physical disabilities face and I had no idea the extent of how bad it is. Overall here the point is surely if a train service is cancelled altogether just because the toilet isn't PRM compliant this makes more of a difficulty to disabled passengers than if the train still ran but without the PRM toilet been their. I would think that disabled passengers would agree too. 

 

As someone else mentions above this situation regarding PRM and non compliant stock becomes more interesting because what happens in a situation where said 150 or whatever unit fails and thus 143s are their too but because the service can't operate with a solo 143 the whole service would be cancelled. Also their is the technicality that does the PRM toilet actually have to be working/useable on the day of travel or just fitted in that specific train. I would suspect the latter so technically the PRM legislations does not totally work in the favour of disabled passengers, thus they could still board and find out later on that the toilet isn't useable. 

 

It's most interesting because in quite a few cases that I have seen legislation does have loopholes especially when specifics are not stated, thus making it open to interpretation. 

 

Kind Regards, 

 

Danny.